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?
Over the next summer and fall, you will be required to submit five different posts reflecting on five different current events. Also respond to a minimum of five posts made by other students. Your sources should be reliable, well-established newspapers, magazines, radio shows, or news programs. Some suggestions are: The Sacramento Bee, The New York Times, The San Fransisco Chronicle, The LA Times, The Washington Post, Time Magazine, The New Yorker, Atlantic Monthly, The New Republic, NPR, BBC, and well-established TV News programs.
Your post should include (you are required to submit five posts that include the following):
- a brief explanation of the article or report
- a brief discussion of any bias in the reporting
- your reflections on the event
- questions that might be answered by other students
- cite where you got your information from and when the report first came out
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hey everyone. Hope you are having a fantastic summer!
ReplyDeleteBy the way, there are around 8 million illegal immigrants working in the United States, while at the same time there are 15 million Americans unemployed. President Obama has been talking about trying to fix the “’broken’ immigration system” but it seems he is all talk. The state of Arizona took matters into their own hands with the law that police could ask any person that looked like an illegal immigrant for their papers. And 20 other states are considering doing the same. President Obama had his first speech on immigration and his plans for how to try and solve the growing problem, but it seems he has not taken any actions to carry out the plans.
This article seemed to be quite biased and it appeared that the author was not a fan of Obama. He stated several times that Obama’s strategy was not so much to change the problem now, but get the Hispanics on his side for the upcoming November election.
I agree with the author and think that because there are so many Americans without work and illegal immigrants with jobs, the issue needs to be taken care of and the president needs to do what is in the best interest of the country and the ACTUAL citizens.
Is president Obama just trying to get more people on his side? And are his interests in the right place for our country and people?
Baker, Peter. “Obama Urges Fix to ‘Broken’ Immigration System”. The New York Times. July 1, 2010.
-Noelle Latham
Hi Noelle! It's Alysa. I'm so glad this has finally started.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the belief that Obama is looking to get more people on his side, all I have to say is: Isn't that what all politicians want?
Keep in mind that as president, Obama made a vow to do the best he could for our country. Our interests, in theory, should then be his interests too. However, I admit that I am very skeptical.
The whole idea of the federal government suing Arizona's government is just rediculous. I realize that federal and state government have a long history of fighting over power, but I find this pathetic. The bill does no harm. Everyone's fear over discrimination is useless; there will always be discrimination no matter what. We find it everywhere, even in places and times it does bot exist. The fact is: We cannot possibly know how large an issue this will be until it is put into action.
Response to Noelle's article:
ReplyDeleteWe also have to keep in mind that Obama is facing other worldwide issues such as the huge BP oil crisis.
Just because he hasn't faced the immigration and unemployment issue head on and immediately does not mean he doesn't believe it is important. Change does take time, but I do agree with the fact that he needs to be more concerned about the country, the needs of the citizens and the astonishing unemployment rate.
After all, he is just human and these issues will not be overseen and the solutions will progress with time.
Hey Sheena!
ReplyDeleteI wrote a lot of what you said in my original response. Unfortunately, because I am on my phone, it erased my first reply. I did a lot of talking about the BP situation, for it deeply concerns me. Again, I think that America is not doing enough- the government anyway. There are plenty of volunteers. Unlike many other issues, the damage of the oil on the environment is permanent. It will not fully recover until after we have all passed away. Don't you remember, though, how long it took Obama to even go there? I just wonder how some of America's worst problems are left neglected for so long...
Hey this is Emily Tristant.
ReplyDeleteFinally someone figured this out! Way to go Noelle.
I agree with Sheena on this matter. When President Obama was elected in to office in 2009, he was greeted with numerous issues of our corrupted country. When people say he is all talk, they have to keep in mind that progress has to start somewhere. Change has to begin with ideas. Hence Obama's slogan "Change we can believe in."
In order to restore our country to its full potential the the belief and faith of the citizens must be restored. I don't think anyone has the right to critisize Obama at this stage in the game because he faces one of the hardest jobs today. At this point he should be backed by the unified support of his country and their prayers.
As I'm sure everyone is aware, Haiti has been a huge topic of interest since the earth quake that occured on January 12th, 2010 and by January 24th there were at least 42 aftershocks. The earthquake was a devastating blow to this third world country.
ReplyDeleteWhat you may not know is that there is an increasingly troubling issue with the amount of homeless citizens. There have been numerous emergency tent cities erected on private property throughout the country. One man, Vladimir Saint-Louis, has over 7,000 homeless Haitians camped out on his private athletic complex. He said that "on the night after the quake, desperate Haitians climbed over collapsed walls and found refuge on his land" (Jean-Francois). Saint-Louis explains how at first he didnt mind considering the state of things, but now it seems as if their stay is permanent and the government is not helping with the matters. Apparently the government is waiting for Haiti pledges to come through and is also busy preparing for the next hurricane season.
I don't think this video has too much bias besides the fact that it is only mainly covering a few people's stories. It covers the views of the homeless, the landowners, and government representatives.
-Is it selfish for these Haitian landowners to be kicking the homeless off their land?
-Should the Haitian government be striving to do more to aid the issue?
-Do you think the U.S. should be doing more to help settle the matter?
This report came out July 10, 2010.
Jean-Francois, Edvige. "Haiti Tent Cities Pit Landowners against Homeless - CNN.com." CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. Web. 11 July 2010. .
Response to Emily's post:
ReplyDeleteEveryone has heard of all the trouble that Haiti is going through and yes i believe their government should be doing more because they are in a state of chaos with the people. It is the governments job to do all they can for their country and i feel like the Haitian government is not stepping up to the plate as much as they could and are waiting for others to do their job for them. And for them to be preparing for the next hurricane season i think is a joke if they haven't even taken care of one that happened 6 months ago. Now as for the civilians trying to kick off the homeless, i have mixed feelings on. I think it is great that they were willing to help but its been months and that is a big burden to take on and i can see why they would now want to kick them off. The homeless Haitians are not the other civilians responsibility. Now for the U.S., I do believe we should be doing as much as we can because Haiti is a third world country and when natural disasters like this take place there is only so much they can do. The U.S. on the other hand has the advances and capabilities to help settle some of the problems and try to get Haiti back on their feet.
Hey guys! :)
ReplyDeleteAs far as the issues in Haiti go: I agree with Noelle. I think it is very nice of the landowners to help their fellow countrymen in this time of disaster but I understand why by now they would want to kick them off their land. I can see where hosting these people would become a burden after a while, especially when these people probably have their own families and reconstructions to take care of. The Haitian government should be doing more for it's people so the landowners don't have this problem and most importantly, so those without homes may get back on their feet again as soon and as comfortably as possible. I too feel that the Haitian government should be doing more for it's people. I can see where they would want to prepare for more disasters, but I also think what they should be doing more of is aiding in the recovery of their people THEN they should be worrying about prevention of another hurricane. Though the prevention of another devastation is important, the fact of the matter is they need to concentrate more on the present than the future. Sometimes I feel that the U.S. is making a bigger effort to help the victims in Haiti than the actual government in Haiti is doing for it's own people! I'm glad we are stepping up and helping them out though. It's definitely the right thing to do and I'm sure it will eventually restore them back to health sooner than if we had stayed out of it.
Millions facing hunger in Niger by Moni Basu
ReplyDeleteFor as long as most of us have been alive, we've heard of the famine and hunger in Africa caused by droughts and other various reasons. We've all seen the commercials with the white man holding swollen little African children saying, "for only 25 cents a month, you can save this child." However an African country you don't often hear about in those commercials is Niger.
This is because compared to the other distressed African countries, Niger seems to be fairly well off. (At least at third world country standards). But the fact is, Niger has been in a serious drought since September 2009. With their livestock dying at an increasing rate, starvation is an inevitable issue. Half of the nation, 8 million people, are threatened with starvation.
The issue is that the aid money and donations are being prioritized to other countries. Unless people become aware of this problem and the situation is made known and important, millions of lives are at stake.
There may be a little bias in this report because it doesn't refer to the problems in other African countries that may indeed be more important.
-Why hasn't Niger been more widely publicized to the world?
-Do you think the hunger in Niger needs more attention then that of other countries?
-What should we do to help?
This report came out July 20, 2010.
Basu, Moni. "Millions Facing Hunger in Niger - CNN.com." CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. Web. 22 July 2010. .
Before I read this article, I had no idea what Niger was or that is was hungry. I must say, I am glad to be educated on the matter. I think the reason this hasn't been more publicized though is because there are several countries out there who are undergoing the same thing. Alot of countries are starving in some way, heck, some people here are either going without food or barely getting by with food stamps! The reason other countries aren't stepping up to help places like Niger are probably simply because they have their own problems and may not have enough money to help every country who is undergoing famine. I don't mean to sound heartless because I really do believe that no one should be without food or water and I wish every country could be helped, but in this world we live in, that's just not possible. What we could do to help is what we do for places like Haiti who are going through similar perils: we could do fundraisers. Major companies like Starbucks or Bel Air could sell a certain item and a percentage of the proceeds could go to those who are starving in Niger or Ethiopia or wherever there is famine or drought. If not that, those places could simply donate supplies to them through various organizations like the one you mentioned where people can adopt a kid or person to send money to.
ReplyDelete“House Passes Jobless Benefits Extension” by Carl Hulse
ReplyDeleteAs you all know, over the past couple years, our country has suffered a massive uproar of unemployment since the economy went down. People stopped buying products, businesses stopped manufacturing due to the lack of purchases, so people lost their jobs. In turn, more and more Americans have had to go on unemployment, getting compensation from the government until they can get back on their feet with another job. The only problem with that is working Americans have to pay extra taxes and due to the rise in unemployment, some people have been simply cut off from that system.
Today the House approved legislation that would allow millions of Americans to have their unemployment benefits back. The author of this article seemed to be amazed that democrats and republicans had been able to reach the decision to restore unemployment. Both sides were fighting for a long time about the benefits of restoring unemployment as well as the hindrances. For example, one argument was the Republicans wanted to avoid taxing the people and use money from other sources while Democrats want to tax American citizens even more than they already are since the feel that they can’t take money from other programs since these programs are already in financial hardship.
-Do you support this decision? How do you feel we should pay for unemployment?
-Should taxes be raised or should unemployment be compensated for by using a different method?
-How long should someone be allowed to receive unemployment benefits? Why?
Hulse, Carl. “House Passes Jobless Benefits Extension.” nytimes.com- U.S- Politics. Web. 22 July 2010.
Response to Emily Tristant's Haiti Post:
ReplyDeleteI am glad Emily wrote about this matter because it has been a huge issue that the world has taken part in solving. I fully agree with Noelle on every aspect. Although I don't believe it is selfish for Haitian landowners to be kicking the homeless of their land because they have been very hospitable and done as much as they can to put out an effortto help them. To proceed with solving the issue of all the homelessness and mass destruction that has occurred, the Haitian government should be taking matters into their hands to relocate people in safe facilities. They should have tried to do this before the U.S. stepped in to alleviate the problem as well; not that this caused conflict of any kind. I commend the US for all the money they have earned to aid Haiti due to the fact that Haiti is a third world country and situations like this should bring the world together. So many organizations have been created to donate money to the cause and I believe it is only a matter of time until the restoration of Haiti begins.
Response to Emily Tristant's post on famine in Niger:
ReplyDeleteI feel that Niger hasn't been as widly publicized with it's current famine issue because, as sad as it is to say, I believe people such as the news and the president see other issues more important. I am not saying they don't believe it is an important issue, I am trying to say that other issues that are striking the world have overcome the issue of drought in Niger. Famine and drought is an issue that has been going on in that area for an elongated period of time and yes it does need to be solved but it also isn't something that can be solved right away due to the fact that it is occurring in more places than one. I agree with Gina's idea of publicizing the issue because it is a good way to make the public aware of the situation.
Response to Gina's unemployment post:
ReplyDeleteI do not support the idea of the government taxing American citizens even more to deal with this issue. Obtaining the money from another area might as well be an issue because the country is already in debt, and who knows where they would pull this money from. I do think that the money for unemployment should be compensated some other way to avoid taxing the citizens. As to how long someone should recieve unemployment, it should be long enough for them to be able to find another job and start making a reasonable income to live a normal life. If an unemployed person knew they would be recieving unemployment money for a vast period of time, they would have no urge or motivation to seek another job in that period that they were practically recieving free money.
Hey guys!
ReplyDeletenew update regarding Noelle's immigration post...
The federal government blocked Arizona's immigration laws... "A federal judge has blocked one of the most controversial sections of a tough Arizona immigration law, granting a preliminary injunction Wednesday that prevents police from questioning people about their immigration status." (maybe arizona really wanted to push federal government into action, more than they actually hoped to take matters into their own hands...)
here is the URL for an article discussing U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton's ruling.
This article was posted at 4:15 today...
On the issue of illegal immigration, i understand Noelle's point that there are US citizens out of work while illegal immigrants are working. however, i question if these US citizens would want all of the jobs that immigrants are occupying. I saw a minute ago on CNN a reprt on a woman who came to America illegally with her mother and sisters when she was eleven, escaping domestic violence. is this wrong? is there middle ground for immigration laws?
sorry, i guess the URL didnt show up...
ReplyDeletehttp://larrykinglive.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/28/judge-blocks-parts-of-arizona-immigration-law/?iref=allsearch
In response to the postings on illegal immigration...
ReplyDeleteThough obviously illegal immigration is wrong and unhealthy for our economy, let's face it: the jobs these illegal aliens are taking here are jobs we as Americans would never dream of taking. Most of these people come over here and they apply for jobs in the production industry which is great. However, it would be better if they would prove their genuine interest in becoming American citizens if they would just come here legally. Plus it would be better for our economy if they became LEGAL, tax paying Americans like everyone else in this country who works. While I think that we should welcome people from abroad, I also think for our country's safety we should buckle down on illegal immigration as to keep any preventable terrorist attacks from happening. While I believe in our philosophy that anyone from any background should be able to come to America and be succesful, I also believe that the world we live in today is far too dangerous for us to be too lenient on illegal aliens. At risk of sounding paranoid, I just wouldn't want the wrong people such as terrorist groups to be able to easily come here and live without us even knowing. But at the same time I want people from other countries to be able to come here and build better lives for themselves. I just think they ought to do it LEGALLY.
As far as Obama goes, I agree with Noelle. I think it is a little strange that there are so many Americans who are without jobs while these illegals are still working. He needs to help his own people who have already paid their dues and who are officially Americans. I understand that he has other issues to deal with, but I think like anything else, this is important as well. What we should do is adopt an immigration system like Australia where if you want to go and live over there you have to have a job first or you just plain can't live there, you have to stay in your own country. Like I said before, I think we should welcome people but I'd like to add to that and say that at this point, they should only be welcomed if they are going to truly contribute to our society by coming here legally and having a job.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Emily's post on Hunger in Niger:
ReplyDeleteI agree with both Sheena and Gina on this and think that Gina's idea of businesses stepping up is just what is needed. There are so many third world countries that are starving and malnourished that we rarely hear about. Like Gina said we can't help them all. But we can always try. I believe that Niger doesn't necessarily need more attention than other third world countries but i believe they need the same as many others get, like as Emily said with Africa. Everybody knows about the hard lives and problems many Africans have and so they get more support from us, and i think that Niger should be no different. I believe that if the problems in Niger were more publicized they would be given more attention and help. Like Gina said there is no way we could help all the starving and deprived third world countries and that is just something we have to face. I think that at this point, the thing that we could do to help the most would just be to get word out about the problems Niger is facing.
Response on emily's Haiti topic:
ReplyDeleteI think that the government probably is trying to do what they can, I mean its not like they are just sitting back and relaxing while everyone is going crazy. Their government has probably also been destroyed from all the devastation they have witnessed. As for the landowners, the ones that are allowing people to stay on their land is so generous. I think that all people with open and good land should offer it up in Haiti because what so they have to lose. Everyone is suffering and if you can help in anyway you might as well. So ya I do think that it is very selfish for them to kick their fellow countrymen off of their land.
Response to emily's Niger post:
ReplyDeleteLet's face it hunger is an issue somewhere in every country, third world or not. Even in America, hunger is presented as a problem especially in the past couple of years dur to the economy. Since, as you have seen advertised on TV, people do donate to the cause of starvation in Africa, they should just divide the funds up evenly, so all the countries and regions have a chance and are given the opportunity for food. Although a problem could be that an organization is not present in niger to help them get food or donations from countries such as America, just like in the books we are reading. I think that alot of Americans already do their part in helping and seriously our country is already suffering, so the people are doing all they can.
Niger probably doesn't necessarily need more attention becuase just becuase AMericans hear about another country that is starving doesn't mean they are going to send more supplies to them, they are already do what they can.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs you all know, the gay community has been fighting for the right to get married all over the country, especially in California. In case you were wondering the up to date history on Prop. 8, it was made to declare that marriage is only between a man and a woman. In 2008, the popular vote to have this constitutional amendment in place was 52 to 48 percent, meaning most of California was in favor of this law. Today a controversial decision was made by Judge Walker that would give the gay community a reason to rejoice: Proposition 8 was overturned on the grounds that it violated the constitutional rights of gays in California. Walker wrote, "Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples." His other reasoning had to do with the fact that it is obvious that California has no desire to discriminate against these people and since Proposition 8 violates its duty to its people for equal rights, it was therefore, unconstitutional.
ReplyDeleteThe author of this article wrote in a slightly biased manner which showed that she was in favor of this change in California law. They even seemed excited for the gay community. This article was filled with quotes from people in the gay community who have made plans to get married or got married in 2008 who were pleased with the Judge's decision.
Although the author seemed to be in favor of the overturning of Proposition 8, she informed her readers of the defense's reasoning behind keeping Proposition 8 intact. The defense argued that throughout history, all we've known as Americans is that marriage is only between a man and a woman and the purpose of it is procreation, so why should a man and a man or a woman and a woman share this same privilege straight people do? Many of the defense attorneys also voiced their concerns for the children of gay couples. They felt that a child's upbringing would be better if the child had a mother and a father. Challengers stuck to the argument that gays have suffered for years from hatred and discrimination and need the law to protect them from prejudice as did people who went through discrimination based on race. Again, the argument against the defense was that Prop. 8 was unconstitutional and violated the fundamental rights of individuals.
Ferriss, Susan. "Judge Rules Proposition 8 Unconstitutional". Sacbee.com. Our Region. 4 August 2010.
URL: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/08/04/2936484/decision-in-prop-8-case-set-for.html
-Do you think the constitutional rights of the people in the gay community should overthrow the rights of those who voted yes on Prop. 8?
-Is there a middle ground on this subject? Could there be some sort of compromise reached between gay activists and the religious community?
-Do you think same sex marriage should be allowed or should there be a non-religious alternative?
- Do you think this case will be taken to the next level? Will the Supreme Court accept this decision?
- Should this question be appealed to the District Appeals Court and then ultimately the United States Supreme Court or should it remain a decision to be made by the voters in each individual state?
First of all I'm a little scared to post this because Loomis is such a small little town and this will be startling to some people BUT...
ReplyDeleteIn response to CowgirlGina's post:
I think that gay people should absolutely have a right to marry. Our society is definitely evolving and there are so many types of family structures existing right now that gay couples is completely okay. There are many children brought up with only one parent, by grandparents, by wolves for all I know... Children of gay couples fare exactly the same way as children with heterogeneous parents. If they want to get married then they shouldn't be denied the right. Why does everyone care what goes on in someone else's bedroom?? It's not their concern and if it doesn't effect them then they shouldn't try to control someone else's marriage and life. If you love someone then legally you should be able to marry them. I am so glad that prop 8 was removed because it was unconstitutional and went against everyone's natural rights. The freedom to marry whomever you choose should be fundamental to our society, love is love no matter what form. People who were in support of Prop 8 could not distinguish the boundary between church and state because denying gays the right to marry means that they don't "believe" it was morally correct, which concerning government, should not be applied. Gays should not be singled out even more then how they are already treated in society. Opposite-sex couples should not be superior to same-sex couples, everyone is created equally. The bottom line is that refusing to allow a couple to marry based on their sexuality goes against the freedoms we were all given by our founding fathers. And of course our founding fathers would be appalled with same-sex marriage, but back then they didn't do a lot of things that are common and accepted now. Times change, we adapt.
India Asks, Should Food Be a Right For the Poor??
ReplyDeleteBasically hungry Indians are supposed to receive subsidized government food and cooking fuel but one family (Ratan Bhuria and his 2 children, his daughter is 4 and weighs 20 lbs and his son is 2 and weighs 8 lbs) have not gotten any along with 421 million other people. The debate is: should the country begin to liberate the poor from the "inefficient, decades-old government food distribution system and try something radical, like simply giving out food coupons, or cash?" The president wants to make a constitutional right to allow everyone to get a monthly 77 lb bag of grain as well as sugar and kerosene but some people think that giving this much freedom to the poor would tempt them to buy anything they wanted...
Even though India has one of the fasted growing economies, its poverty and hunger rates remain super high. Right now the food system is criticized for corruption and inefficiency, but with so many people malnourished, some say the food system needs change - there was a ton of surveys done on child deaths. Many families have many children and grooms have to pay a "bride price" before a wedding. This coupled with insufficient jobs like farming creates struggles to feed a large family. Moneylenders are common in India and families try that, but are thrust into debt when they cant pay them back. Efforts are supposedly being made to reform the food system like tracking grain shipments. Pro-market supporters believe that "issuing either food coupons or direct payments" would overcome a lot of the "corruption and allow recipients more mobility and freedom of choice. They point to the eventual creation of a new national identity system — in which every person will have a number — as a tool that can make such direct benefits possible."
I think the author had a bit of bias in support of giving food to the poor and improving the food system in India. The author kept mentioning how many children were in the malnutrition hospitals and how many children died a week...
I feel bad for the Indian families who are less fortunate than I, but why do you choose to have so many children!!?? Thats one of the problems for sure! If you only had to feed 2 or 3 kids then you might not be in debt and you would be able to feed everyone substantially. I don't know, just a thought... And I think it would be bad to give out cash instead of just the food because then the poor people could buy alcohol or some other drug and waste their precious money when they could be helping their families.
Maybe other students would actually read the original article and catch something I didn't, but I think I pretty much laid out the gist of it all, I cant really decided if I am for giving food to the poor or against it because if I was a poor Indian person I would definitely want free food, but seeing that I don't live in India, I don't have that strong an opinion on it. (This is my first post of a event by the way, thats why its probably wrong)
Maybe some students would ask exactly what kind of food cards they would give and the limit, and what is too much to give?
New York Times online
India Asks, Should Food Be A Right For The Poor?
by Jim Yardley
Published August 8th 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/09/world/asia/09food.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=global-home
India Asks, Should Food Be a Right For the Poor??
ReplyDeleteBasically hungry Indians are supposed to receive subsidized government food and cooking fuel but one family (Ratan Bhuria and his 2 children, his daughter is 4 and weighs 20 lbs and his son is 2 and weighs 8 lbs) have not gotten any along with 421 million other people. The debate is: should the country begin to liberate the poor from the "inefficient, decades-old government food distribution system and try something radical, like simply giving out food coupons, or cash?" The president wants to make a constitutional right to allow everyone to get a monthly 77 lb bag of grain as well as sugar and kerosene but some people think that giving this much freedom to the poor would tempt them to buy anything they wanted...
Even though India has one of the fasted growing economies, its poverty and hunger rates remain super high. Right now the food system is criticized for corruption and inefficiency, but with so many people malnourished, some say the food system needs change - there was a ton of surveys done on child deaths. Many families have many children and grooms have to pay a "bride price" before a wedding. This coupled with insufficient jobs like farming creates struggles to feed a large family. Moneylenders are common in India and families try that, but are thrust into debt when they cant pay them back. Efforts are supposedly being made to reform the food system like tracking grain shipments. Pro-market supporters believe that "issuing either food coupons or direct payments" would overcome a lot of the "corruption and allow recipients more mobility and freedom of choice. They point to the eventual creation of a new national identity system — in which every person will have a number — as a tool that can make such direct benefits possible."
I think the author had a bit of bias in support of giving food to the poor and improving the food system in India. The author kept mentioning how many children were in the malnutrition hospitals and how many children died a week...
I feel bad for the Indian families who are less fortunate than I, but why do you choose to have so many children!!?? Thats one of the problems for sure! If you only had to feed 2 or 3 kids then you might not be in debt and you would be able to feed everyone substantially. I don't know, just a thought... And I think it would be bad to give out cash instead of just the food because then the poor people could buy alcohol or some other drug and waste their precious money when they could be helping their families.
Maybe other students would actually read the original article and catch something I didn't, but I think I pretty much laid out the gist of it all, I cant really decided if I am for giving food to the poor or against it because if I was a poor Indian person I would definitely want free food, but seeing that I don't live in India, I don't have that strong an opinion on it. (This is my first post of a event by the way, thats why its probably wrong)
Maybe some students would ask exactly what kind of food cards they would give and the limit, and what is too much to give?
New York Times online
India Asks, Should Food Be A Right For The Poor?
by Jim Yardley
Published August 8th 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/09/world/asia/09food.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=global-home
In response to Ciara's post on hunger in India:
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Ciara's post and the article she read, I'd think that obviously India's system is flawed and the government needs to do something about it. Starvation exists everywhere around the world, but it seems to be the worst in overly populated places like India or Africa. So I'd think that in such dire times as these, a change is most definitely in order. If the government isn't going to change the way it distributes food, then it has to do something like perhaps limit the number of children each family is allowed to produce depending on their income.
I think the best thing to do though is to change the system in which food is distributed altogether. I read in the article that the current government in India wastes over 70% of it's $12 billion budget on bureaucratic and transportation costs when over 42% of its children are underweight. Though transportation is a necessity, the fact still remains that people are starving. I think the government should start by incorporating food stamps or coupons into their system. They could also do what Americans did in the 30s which was give out ration cards to each family so everyone can get a certain amount of necessities until they find a better way to fix their system.
As Ciara mentioned, you’d think that if someone was poor and could barely feed two children they would stop reproducing for a while at least until they know they have the means to support them. This family featured in the article is a prime example of why so many people are malnourished or starving to death in India. Honestly if this was a perfect world, I’d hate to tell people how to live their lives, but I really think they should have stopped having kids when they knew how difficult it was to support the two they already had. I don’t think the poor should be given free food, but at the same time, how are they going to get food if they have no means of obtaining it? As I mentioned, I think the poor should receive food ration cards for a limited time just to see if it helps improve the situation. They definitely shouldn’t just get cash, because like Ciara said, they would probably go spend it on something like alcohol or drugs. But I also believe something must be done, a radical/humane way of changing the lives of India's population is imperative to improving their current situation.
Well said, Ciara. I agree with alot of your key points. When Prop 8 was being voted on, I was shocked that such a thing should even be up for the law to decide. And then when it actually passed, I began to wonder where all the decency of California had gone. I don't mean to offend anyone's beliefs or disrespect their religion, but something like sexual orientaion and life parters is something no one can dictate about another person. One of the key principles of our nation is the separation of church and state. It was for that reason that people came to America in the first place; to escape persecution they faced in their former country. To deny a person the right to be married to someone they love is downright un-American and wrong.
ReplyDeleteThe religious community should stay out of this matter to a certain extent in my opinion. If the issue is within the church such as a same sex couple being married in that church, that is for the church to decide. But if a homogeneous couple want to be parters that is not for a nonaffiliated religious group to interfere with.
This should definitely stay within our state government because now that the prop has been overturned and the public agrees with it, there is no need for it to go any further.
American Muslims ask, Will We Ever Belong?
ReplyDeleteAs the anniversary to 9/11 is coming up, American Muslims are facing intolerance and suspicion. Many are scared for their safety and wonder as to why this sudden increase in prejudice occured when they thought they were on the path towards acceptance. In New York, strong opposition has sparked vandalism and violence to the idea of a Muslim culutral center near ground zero. American Muslims say they feel more scared right now than they did after 9/11 and wonder if ever there will be a time where Americans no long want them here. Many muslims choose to live in the US because they are allowed certain freedoms not granted by other countries. But after an increase in hate crimes including equipment set on fire on a mosque construction site in TN, teens shooting outside a mosque in NY, and grafitti pig through into one in CA, many are wondering if they ever will not have to face prejudice. The man proposing the idea of the Muslim Cultural religion center, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, says that their is a desire to paint an entire religion as an enemy. Muslim organizations are urging people to attend commemoration serivces and community events in honor of 9/11.
There is no bias in the article, the author is neutral when stating their facts and interviews.
When I read this article, I could believe some of the events that were taking place. It's sad to me to see a whole group of people trying to start a successful life full of freedom in America but instead are faced with harassment and hate because of their relgion. America is supposed to stand for acceptance of others, and have equal rights for all. Instead, American Muslims are being treated poorly because people are paranoid and ignorant about other religions. In the article they compared it to the Irish Roman Catholics in the 1800s and the Japanese before WWII. People panic and direct their anger towards innocent people just because they feel better to have someone to blame. This is not only wrong but is sad to see our country repeating its same mistakes.
-Why do people assume because an American is Muslim that they are also a terrorist?
-Why would the idea of builing a Muslim cultural center scare people?
Found In:
American Muslims Ask, Will We Ever Belong?
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
nytimes.com
Published September 5, 2010
Hi guys, Elaine Foley, so in response to Caitlins post about the American Muslims, I think that most people would be afraid of building a Muslim cultural center because that would be like inviting the "enemy" right in, and making them feel welcome, which directly contradicts human instinct.
ReplyDeleteAs for asuming because someone is Muslim, they are a terrorist, its just like every other stereotype out there now, ex. Asians are bad drivers and so on. Also the hype and fear the media pumps into peoples minds has got them somewhat trained to automatically view a Muslim in a certain way. Its a natural response for people to be afraid, but to take it so far and out of proportion is a sad thing...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Caitlin's article...
ReplyDeleteEven though America is known for its tolerance of different religions, citizens of our country have continued to be prejudiced. As Caitlin said, the prejudice against American Muslims has risen especially since the idea of building a mosque at the 9/11 site has reached public ears. Kind of going off of what Elaine said… People assume American Muslims are terrorists probably for the same reason some people assume all Mexicans are illegals: because a small group out of that demographic did something that forever tainted the face of their ethnicity. In this case, of course, it was people who were Muslims who crashed into the Twin Towers and killed so many Americans. People still assume they are terrorists out of the sheer fear of another occurrence such as 9/11 taking place again and because they are still grieving for loved ones lost in the attack. The way I see it, people are not only afraid of the idea of a mosque being built or letting in the enemy, they may also feel insulted. They are afraid to let these people do this for reasons already explained and they find it insulting due to the fact that members of this ethnic group were the ones who made a tragedy such as 9/11 even come to happen in the first place. It is sad that the majority of these people, the Muslims who obviously are not terrorists have to take the blame. But at the same time, it’s sad that Americans had to go through what they went to which made them feel the way they do towards this idea to start with.
In Response to Gina's Gay Marriage:
ReplyDeleteI am under the belief that everyone is equal and believed that this right was protected under the Constitution. As in the Declaration of Independence; Thomas Jefferson writes that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." And as everyone is allowed to interpret the Constitution, I choose to interpret this as extending to gays, which in my mind believes that they are allowed to marry, if they so wish. I believe that Prop 8 would be limiting the natural rights of citizens, by limiting their choices of lifestyle.
Since the 1950's family has been changing, from a four person family to single mothers, and multicultural families, so maybe allowing gay marriage is a natural progression.
The article I read concerns the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. For those of you who may not know, that is the policy in which the military is restricted from investigating and revealing closet lesbians, gays, and bisexuals applying to, are, or have served. In addition, those who openly have such sexual orientation are forbidden from military positions. It restricts the freedom of speech for any non-heterosexual person so that they cannot discuss their orientation or even speak of their relationships as long as they are serving.
ReplyDeleteIt is probably no surprise that singer Lady Gaga is not in favor of this policy. Yesterday, she held a rally in Maine with the hopes of convincing the senators of voting to repeal the policy. Today, senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, both Republican, could be the deciding votes. Along with her, members discharged because of the policy stood on stage and declared their point-of-views. She pointed out the injustice of banning any gay person while those who hate and condemn such go unnoticed.
Personally, I love the spunk Gaga is showing. I believe that this policy is completely unconstitutional and unjust. It discriminates on such shaky, indefinite grounds. As long as any “offender” does not harm someone else by their sexual orientation in any way, there should be no concern for such information. That is the ONLY circumstance they should be punished, and it is not for their sexuality but instead for actual crimes.
MSNBC. "Lady Gaga Targets Maine Senators on 'Don't Ask'" MSNBC.com. Associated Press, 20 Sept. 2010. Web. 20 Sept. 2010. .
So what do you think of Lady Gaga stepping up to the plate and taking a swing at politics?
Do you believe the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy is unconstitutional? Why or why not?
How would you feel in each side (the heterosexual and the homosexual/bisexual)?
In response to Alysa's article:
ReplyDeleteI think that Lady Gaga is doing some good by trying to influence politics. She's voicing her opinion and using her fame in a positive way in something she believes in. Just like any other Americans she has a right to express what she thinks. I think it would be better if more stars used their influence because it draws people to important political issues. I believe that the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is unconstitutional because it restricts certain people from joining the army just based on their homosexuality. It's not the army's right to exclude people from joining just based on that. As morghan said in her response, it limits a person's natural rights by saying they aren't allowed to join.
As everyone knows, recently California has been pushing to legalize marijuana for recreational use. In 1996, California became the first state to legalize the distribution of marijuana solely for medical purposes, since then, 13 states including DC have followed suit. Last year, President Obama said the medical use of marijuana will not be prosecuted, however, he also said the government will “vigorously enforce” federal laws against pot even if Prop 19 is passed. On Friday, Attorney General Eric Holder said, "Let me state clearly that the Department of Justice strongly opposes Proposition 19," Holder said in the letter, dated Wednesday. "If passed, this legislation will greatly complicate federal drug enforcement efforts to the detriment of our citizens." The prosecution of marijuana crimes is a core priority of the Department of Justice whether Prop 19 is passed by voters on November 2nd or not.
ReplyDeleteThings to Consider:
-Do you think the federal government’s intention to enforce laws against recreational use of marijuana constitutional even if the state voters approve Prop 19? Why?
- Is this an encroachment upon the rights of states or is this a reasonable way to react to the possible passing of Prop 19?
-Do you think Prop 19 would be more destructive or beneficial to California? Why or why not?
“Obama Administration says it will ‘vigorously enforce’ federal pot laws”
Written by Kevin Yamamura
Sacramento Bee, Saturday October 16 2010
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/10/16/3108453/obama-administration-says-it-will.html
In response to Caitlin's post about American Muslims:
ReplyDeleteOne cannot deny that since 9/11 America's perception of Muslims has been warped. This is only to be expected, considering we are fighting this "War on Terror" against religious extremists. However, as Americans have been known to do repeatedly throughout history, we let our fears have the best of us and over generalize the group that is truly a threat to us. Because we are in a war where the enemy is not clearly known, the general public denotes the Muslims as the "bad guys." Americans are ignorant, and feel safe when they take part in what the majority does.
As to the Muslim Cultural Center that was such a huge controversy around 9/11 this year, I think Americans were taking the issue too personally. They thought that the Muslims building a cultural center so close to ground zero was like a slap in the face. Although many may have been offended they once again have to take into account that America was founded on separation of church and state and freedom from persecution. Just because the building was Muslim, people disregarded that they have the freedom to practice their religion and that its highly unlikely they're spawning new generations of extremists.
In response to Alysa's post:
ReplyDeleteI have mixed feelings about celebrities becoming involved in politics. Yes, they are citizens and have the right to express their opinion, but at the same time they have alot of money and resources to influence people which gives them alot of power.
I certainly believe the don't ask, don't tell policy is unconstitutional. It cleary discriminates against an individual's sexual orientation. The government cannot deny or accept someone based on whether or not they are gay, lesbian, or bisexual. It violates the right of equality for all persons.
Both heterosexuals and homosexuals should be infuriated with the law. On what basis can the military declare they won't except a person because they are gay? It's just wrong.
In response to Gina's post:
ReplyDeleteThe fight between federal and state government is one thats been seen again and again throughout our country's history. Prop 19 is one of the most controversal laws that was up for election in November. The law did not end up passing. The positives of legalization would have been the revenue collected from taxing of the drug. Also the money saved from having to enforce the law. With California's huge deficit, we could have used the money. On the other hand, the negatives would have been the opposition of the federal government. Federal law clearly states that production and distribution of marijuana is illegal. There is no doubt that they would have taken action against the law if it had been passed. They even said they would. As well, federal law almost always triumphs state. For these reasons, I think it was a good thing proposition 19 did not pass.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSo i realize that this is a little outdated, but i think it is becoming a hot topic. The full body scanners in airports for security. Instead of just the metal detector, we have moved up to using a full body scanner to insure the safety of all of the civilians. These scanners can find things that a metal detector may not be able to pick up such as ceramic knives and bomb components. The safety of passengers is extremely important but where do we draw the line of safety and privacy. The full body scanners come up with a picture of the person without clothes. This has been a problem for many people because they do not want some random person looking at their body. They don't know who is the one who is in charge of reviewing the image or anything and many people are uncomfortable with that. Another problem that has come about with this is that there are different levels of censorship of the photos. The machines also have the capability of storing and transmitting the images. The administraters have said that they get one image and before the next person goes through, the image is deleted. But critics believe that the scanners could be abused by operators and they still don't provide agains't powder explosives. Some people believe that these machines are a total invasion of privacy and are now giving up flying in order to not give up that right. The government plans to have these in many airports and to use them as a first-line tool. So you will either need to go through the body scanner or get a full on body search in order to travel by plane.
ReplyDeleteThis article was not too biased. I feel like the author was against the body scanners but mainly gave facts instead of opinions. He also displayed a little bit of both sides of the argument.
I have mixed feelings against this. I am more against it then for it but i do believe our safety is very important. I feel like this might be taking it too far and we need to find another solution.
Are these body scanners really worth giving up our privacy? Where do we draw the line between safety and privacy?
"Mixed Signals on Airport Scanners"
Written by: Matthew L. Wald
January 12, 2010, The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/13/us/13scanners.html
In response to Ciara's India food post:
ReplyDeleteI believe that no one should have to go hungry. I know that we cannot solve all world hunger but believe that we always need to try. Here in America, not many of us have had to deal with starving or not having enough food for our families. That is a very different story in the rest of the world though. I do not believe that we should be handing out money to the poor because we would have no way of knowing what they could be using it on. I do believe that we should provide them food for themselves and their families. I agree with Ciara on the deal about having so many children. If you can't afford children then you should think about having them and how your life is going to affect theirs, and what would be best for your situation. Either way, i still think that we need to help these people who can only do so much for themselves and their families.
In response to Gina's Prop 19 post:
ReplyDeleteLike Emily said, the law didn't pass in November. It still created a ton of controversy though. Yes, we need the money that we could get from the incredibly high tax we could put on the drug, but the feds are against it. And if we were to go against their laws then the consequences could be huge. Even though we would have been making a much needed profit for our state, the feds could cut a lot of our funding for us going against them. I personally think that it is a good thing that the law didn't pass. I believe it would have created a bigger problem then it could have solved. Gina asked if we believed if it was an encroachment on the states rights, and i don't believe so. If Prop 19 would have passed then that would be that, but there would be consequences i believe for going against the federal government and their law.
In response to noelle's article about scanners:
ReplyDeleteI also have mixed feelings over the full body scanners. I think they are invasive of people's privacy and another solution may be better. However, since no other solution has come up, and along with the ever growing need for higher security measures in our airports I think that they are better security than the metal dectors we have now. At an airport, people know that their stuff can be searched at any time. It may be alittle invasive but it's for the security of all people flying. I think I would rather go through a scanner than get on a plane with a potentially dangerous person. People uncomfortable should help think of a new idea instead of complaining and making the situation more difficult.
The United States has been at war with Afghanistan for 10 years now, and has created quite a bit of controversy. Obama came out this Thursday morning with his evaluation of his one year assessment of his plan to increase the number of troops. Obama said that as he promised we would begin withdrawing troops in July but still states that the war will be a "very difficult endeavor." Even though we have had some gains over the past year, we have lost more troops than at any other time of the war. According to Obama, his war plan is still in effect and plans that U.S. troops will remain there for 4 more years. There are approximately 100,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan and 40,000 NATO allies as well. The war with Afghanistan has become one of the longest wars our country has ever had. The goal is to be able to turn total control over to Pakistan eventually but it is said that the progress is not coming nearly fast enough and we can’t completely pull out until our government believes that the Pakistan government can control their own country, and deal with “terrorist safe havens” within their borders.
ReplyDeleteThings to Consider:
What do we do if Pakistan government cannot take control of their people?
Has the war been worth all the casualties and should we stay in and risk more?
Is it even a winnable war? What needs to happen for it to be considered won?
“Obama: US on track in Afghanistan, Pakistan”
Written by: Ben Feller
December 16, 2010, Yahoo! News
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101216/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_us_afghanistan
In response to Noelle's article about scanners....
ReplyDeletethe scanners are and the TSA are simply a waste of money. The government has installed all these expensive methods in a effort to provide airports safety, when there is one simple inexpensive solution; profiling. We have to stop searching for the bomb or weapon and instead go to the source. Searching random people and there items is creating more work and more discomfort to travelers. It's like saying I need to find one red sock in this pile of socks, but wait before I start looking I am going to add 100 more red and orange socks, and so I am not bias, I will only open my eyes every other minute. As sad as it is we all know who is more likely to want to hijack a plane, and ignoring this knowledge is creating more work.
some complain about the indecency of profiling. My dad was recently flying for work and he witnessed at "pat down" of a 70 year old white women on her way to disneyland with her grandchild. She was mortified as people started at her and the person administrating the pat down said "now miss, I am going to put my hand between your breast..." as she turned bright red and was stared at by strangers. Now is this decent? Profiling is used by the FBI and police force daily, and it is time it is used in airports instead of expensive, embarrassing scanners and pat downs.
madeline
This Saturday, the Senate voted to end the 17 year ban on the policy that was passed while Clinton was in office, known as the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. Prior to that gays and lesbians were simply not permitted to serve since World War I. This change won’t take effect immediately, though. First, the president and his top military advisors have to prove that lifting the ban won’t hurt the troop’s ability to fight. Then there is a 60 day waiting period for the military. Many are saying allowing gays and lesbians to serve in the military is the next step toward equality, and other issues such as gay marriage lie ahead. However, there are those who believe the passing of this law has put our troops at risk in the midst of war time. They feel the law will create for issues than it solves.
ReplyDeleteThe author seems to be a bit biased towards gay rights. She talks a lot about how the repeal of the ban is a huge victory for the gay community and how it is a step in creating equality. Even when the author brings up the viewpoint against the repealing of the law, she follows it with why they are wrong.
I agree that this is a victory for gays and lesbians in the United States. We are all equal no matter what sexual orientation we have and it is not right for our service members to have to hide who they are. The end to this ban is a historic moment for our country.
-Do you think gays and lesbians add an unnecessary distraction in the military?
-Is this law a necessary step towards equality for homosexuals?
Dobnik, Verena. "Gay See Repeal As A Civil Rights Milestone." Yahoo! News. 19 Dec. 2010. Web. 19 Dec. 2010. .
Yesterday, Saturday the 18th the United States senate blocked the "Dream Act" that would allow young immigrants to become legal if they enroll in college or the military. The act failed with a close 55 to 41 vote, according to the article republican votes tipping the scales. If passed the act would have given legal status to between 1 and 2 million immigrants brought to the U.S. before age 16. The blocked act was important because it could decided Latinos votes for the next and future election.
ReplyDeleteThe article portrayed only the dissapointment of the blocked act. The articles picture was of a young women crying wearing a UCLA sweatshirt while embracing her friend, causing the reader to have sympathy. Also the quotes in the article were from mostly democrats. The arguments behind blocking the bill were not explained, and there was even a quote from Obama who was bashing the blocked act. Also the title was "Republicans block youth immigration bill" when 5 democrats voted to block the bill. The article was bias in favor of the Dream Act.
I am on the side of not passing the act. Encouraging and letting people get away with illegal immigration is not a tradition the United States should build. The thousands of people from Asia and elsewhere who are trying to become citizens the legal way are going to resort to illegal methods if we set a precedent that illegal immigration is acceptable. As sad as it may be that illegal students and those serving can't become citizens, they have to follow the laws just like everyone else.
Things to consider:
Should becoming a legal citizens be an easier process?
Should citizenship be a reward?
Should acceptance into College and the Military require United States Citizenship?
The Associated Press. "Republicans Block Youth Immigration Bill."
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/12/18/3267309/republicans-block-youth-immigration.html
in response to Madeline's "Dream Act' post:
ReplyDeletei feel like this is a very difficult article to pick a side on. It is hard when people are just trying to make a better lives for themselves but are going about it illegally. Right now there are many legal U.S. students who need and want a college education, and we don't have enough money for all the kids who are already citizens so if we were to throw in legal immigrants than that would just mean that it would be costing us more money. I feel that in order to be accepted into a United States college or the United States military, yes you need to be a United States citizen. it is the citizens who are paying for these programs anyways and it wouldn't be fair for those opportunities to be taken by illegal immigrants.
"Boomers, health system to collide"
ReplyDeleteBy the time next month rolls around, some of the baby boomers, people born after World War II, are going to start retiring. When the boomers are 75 million strong, there is a lot to consider. With health care costs rising combining with boomer retirements, the health care system will be facing immense pressure. California has the most baby boomers and also has the largest financial pressure being put on its safety net. Medicare, the national health system for older adults, has a great challenge ahead of it. In order to compensate for the incoming of millions of retirees, there will probably be a combination of "scaled-back benefits and higher out-of-pocket costs" for each retiree. Shouldering some of the costs will prove impossible for some boomers that didn't save enough during their working days. In addition to Medicare feeling the heat, state and local health programs are dwindling. There are also fewer and fewer primary care doctors that are accepting Medicare patients. This is just one of the many problems that have been forseen, and yet, some issues won't arise until boomers are well into retirement.
There is no bias in this article. It is composed of factual information and predictions of what the future may look like. The only bias may come from Rita Rogers, an actual baby boomer.
I think this retirement situation is a tragedy. I see myself watching the View while folding laundry and going on power walks with my old fart friends, not trying to continue to support myself like I did for the first 65 years. Perhaps the situation will improve by the time my generation retires. I am obviously more concerned for my parents, namely my father who is, in fact, a baby boomer. He will be retiring here soon and he has done a bang-up job saving his money so he should be alright, but I think he is going to work an extra few years just so he won't think twice about riding his mountain bike every day of retirement. Another thing that bothered me about the article is that California has the lowest doctor participation in Medicare. What? This is where we need it the most! Come on! The positive side that I can find in this mess, is that if people my age graduate medical school, they will not have a very hard time finding work. Especially if they are primary care doctors or anything in the field of geriatrics.
Will there be enough facilities to house/support the aging population?
Will there be enough Medicare?
Is living a long time a good thing or a bad thing?
Emily Bazar and April Dembosky, The Sacramento Bee, 26 December 2010.
In response to Madeline's "Dream Act" post:
ReplyDeleteWhile equality is a strong basis of this country, there are some measures that have been taken or will be taken that take equality too far. Doling out the rights to be a citizen to every enrolled immigrant is unjust. I have always felt that if a person from a foreign country can work hard enough, apply, and get into a university, then he/she should be able to attend, no matter the cost. I thought that up until the day that I started applying to colleges. As a semi-intelligent person (as I'm sure all the AP Lang students are) I had a long list of things to research about each college. I was guaranteed admission into many of the UC's but I was NOT guaranteed a major. Many classes are impacted and some students cannot even get into general education classes. Thus, it takes each student much longer to graduate. If illegal aliens were granted citizenship for enrolling in college, there would be even more people in each class and American high school students will get left in the cold after being easily replaced. I think that every person deserves an education, but not at the cost of the chances of others. On the military side of the Dream Act, I think that the incentive of citizenship will encourage many more people to enlist. And may get some more women out there!! This will be beneficial to this country because we will have a stronger defense system. Although, I would hope with so many people to choose from, that the military picks the best of the bunch. All in all, if I could rewrite the bill for the Dream Act, I would basically cut it in half and remove the part about college but let the military aspect remain.
"British colleges offer elitism at a bargain to U.S. students"
ReplyDeleteEducation is an extremely competitive field to play on. In the U.S., colleges are becoming increasingly difficult to get into. On occasion, applicants don't get accepted to any of the colleges they applied to. That's when they turn to universities 4,898 miles away. St. Andrews, a college in Scotland, offers their education to Americans for a much lower price than the Ivy Leagues that they were wait-listed for. "U.K. universities have emerged as a worthy consolation prize for students rebuffed from Ivy League schools." Because of the discount price, and other attractive factors, the population of U.S. undergraduates at United Kingdom schools has increased 30% in 5 short years. Americans focus on Scottish colleges because their four-year "collegiate model" closely resembles that of U.S. schools, whereas English universities graduate students in three years and stress specialization over general education.
There was a slight bias choosing a school in the U.K. is better but there was evidence to support that claim. I did think it was funny because the vice principal of St. Andrews said "If you just fail to get in at Harvard, we're happy to have you at St. Andrews because it means you're bloody good!"
In conjunction with my response to Madeline's post, I believe college is one of the most important steps a young person takes and the worst thing would be to make a misstep. The idea of going to the U.K. for an education is utterly stupendous! British colleges are prestigious yet they actually accept people, they are cheaper yet the students are still receiving a magnificent education, the history is rich on many of the campuses, and attending them would be an experience of a lifetime. Honestly, if I hadn't already decided on a school, you better believe that I would apply to St. Andrews and every other British school.
Would you want to attend a school in the U.K.?
Is the decision to go overseas really a smart one?
What are the negative aspects of British colleges?
Daniel De Vise, The Sacramento Bee, 26 December 2010
In response to Cassandra's over seas schools....
ReplyDeleteI think that their idea is brilliant in having top notch schools over seas that they can try and compare to Ivy League schools. Some people might not like the idea and would probably think that the schools are not even close to the Ivy League, but really why does it matter? The name on the school is not always what is important though but rather where one feels they might fit in more/better. Also I think that there idea is good becuase they are making their fees cheaper than the Ivy schools, which could easily attract more people maybe on the East Caost. Personally I would not want to go to school over seas though. Schooling may be cheaper but then you will just have to pay more to travel home and such.
"Muslim Women in U.S. slowly break stereotypes"
ReplyDelete"There is a missing link in terms of what the Muslim religion teaches about gender equality," said Soumaya Khalifa, the founder of the Islamic Speakers Bureau of Atlanta. She is completely right. Influence is generated by going to religious services and in countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the majority of the attendees are male. In America, however, women are just as common at these services as men. A survey conducted in March 2009 concluded that "Muslim American women come closer than women of any other faith to earning what their male counterparts do." Khalifa is one of many vocal Muslim women wary of the "predominantly male leadership of their community." These women have achieved success and visibility that is unparalleled elsewhere. These women stand by America and contribute a large part of their strength to the freedoms of the U.S. For this reason, more Muslims are coming to America. A professor of Islamic studies at Duke University, Ebrahim Moosa, says "Muslims coming to North America are often seeking an egalitarian version of Islam that forces women onto the agenda and makes them much more visible."
The only possibility of bias is in the words of Ebrahim Moosa; the word 'forces' is a tad bit negative. Other than that, this article was relatively unbiased.
I realize that this might be a tough article to respond to, but I felt so passionately about it that it had to be written. Plus, most of the AP Lang students are female.... Anyways, my dad rents foreign movies from Netflix and once he got "The Stoning of Soraya M." A basic gist of the movie: a man wants to marry another woman so he makes up this story about his current wife having an affair. Infidelity is a HUGE no-no. In the end, the woman gets stoned by her town and her father event though she didn't do anything wrong. This movie made me incredibly upset and I was appalled by how women were treated in Western European countries. Reading this article, it made me feel ten times better; the article was a joy for me to read.
What are your thoughts on the current situations for females in Islamic countries?
How does it make you feel that women are being more vocal in America?
Brian Knowlton, The New York Times, seen in The Sacramento Bee on 28 December 2010.
"Twin Rivers schools given funding freedom"
ReplyDeleteThere is a program called Strategic School Funding for Results (SSFR) and the goal of the program is to equally distribute resources, including effective teachers. There are three school districts statewide that are participating in SSFR. Usually, school districts decide staffing ratios and programs to be offered for all schools. SSFR would give this power to the individual school leaders, i.e. the principals. By giving principals financial freedom, district officials begin to hope that education will break away from the "one-size-fits-all" model. The school leaders aren't getting more money but more flexibility.
This article was slightly biased towards the program; the article and the people quoted thought very highly of SSFR.
I think SSFR is a stupendous idea. Classes can cater towards the students' needs; therefore, the children will find that their education is more beneficial. I think the most important part would be finding effective teachers for the students. The material can either be understood or not, but the way it's taught makes all the difference.
Will SSFR be successful?
Do you think other districts will take part?
What are the negative aspects of this program?
Melody Gutierrez, The Sacramento Bee, 28 December 2010
"States across nation take aim at illegal immigrants"
ReplyDeleteArizona has been trying to create a secure border for some time now by changing the enforcement on illegal immigrants. Arizona can question people if they have "probable cause" that the person is an illegal alien. Many say that this will result in racial profiling. But Arizona started a trend that won't seem to die down; states are following in Arizona's footsteps and maybe even taking it one step further. Last year, about 1,500 immigration-related bills were introduced in statehouses. A state lawmaker from Oklahoma is making legislation that would allow "Oklahoma authorities to seize and keep the vehicle of anyone found to be harboring an illegal immigrant who is a passenger, regardless of whether smuggling was suspected. The measure would categorize undocumented immigrants as 'human contraband.'"
There was a bit of bias, in my opinion. It seemed as if the author didn't agree with the new immigration trend. The word 'republican' was thrown around a lot.
I think the measures that Governors are trying to get passed are much too drastic. I know there are many reasons for illegal immigrants to not be granted citizenship, especially in these economic times, but I cannot find it in me to punish anyone that just wants a better life. What Oklahoma is starting is a watered-down version of what Adolf HItler did in the early 1900's.
Do you agree/disagree with the new policies that people are determined to see through?
How do you think the federal government will react to their power being threatened?
What would your solution be to the immigration issue?
Laura Litvan, The Sacramento Bee, 29 December 2010
The article discusses animal cruelty in Thailand, displaying Pata Zoo as an example. The zoo is in the same building as a department store, which leaves the animals with limited housing and trapped in the event of a fire. The fine for animal cruelty is roughly $33, or a month in jail. Even so, the laws on what defines animal cruelty are so vague that it is easy to get away with the mistreatment of animals. In the Pata Zoo example, the zoo’s main attraction, a female gorilla named Bua Noi is contained within a 10 by 15 yard pin. Despite protestors’ attempts, the zoo has not been shut down and continues to renew its permit with no penalties. The Thai Animal Guardian Association and other animal-rights groups have proposed a bill to enhance the animal protection laws currently in place, which has gotten little attention.
ReplyDeleteThe bias comes from the way the reporter seems to be on the side of the protestors and weakly defends the point of view of the zoo.
Regardless of where an animal is, I firmly believe, it should be taken care of with the utmost care possible. The government should put laws in place to protect the animals, who cannot speak for themselves. I believe outside countries with better established animal protection laws, such as America, should attempt to guide the Thai government towards the development of laws similar to their own. Animal cruelty is something that is a considerable issue today, even in America. Everyday, I see countless commercials regarding the adoption or sponsoring of abused animals. Just last week, I was watching a program with park rangers, and I was shocked with how poorly even they treated the animals they were rescuing. (They put a shark in an ice chest with so little water its fin was protruding the surface.)
So what can we do to help the animals all over the world? What sort of protections should new laws include? Where do you draw the line between cruelty and care?
Chomchuen, Warangkana. "Concrete Jungle: Department Store's Zoo Sparks Controversy." World Blog. 29 Dec. 2010. Web. 29 Dec. 2010.
West Africa is back on the brink violent conflict due to a national election that were supposed to unite the Ivory Coast. On Thursday the 2nd, Alassane Ouatarra was declared the winner of the presidential election with 54.1% of the votes beating the current president Laurent Gbagbo with 45.9% percent of the votes. The results of this election were verified by the African Union, the Unites Nations, and the White House. President Gbagbo's mandate as president expired back in 2005, but he stayed in office because of possible violence outbreaks from an election. He stated that the winning of the election by Ouatarra was "attempted coup" and on Friday the council declared that Gbagbo had actually won the election. The head of the council declared that the reason for the mistake was that 7 of the northern regions (where Ouatarra was most popular) were "fradulent", therefore making Gbagbo the President once again. As soon as the news was made on national televsion, many youth went out to the strrets and began burning tires, tearing down billboards, and throwing chunks of concrete. This election was supposed to help bring peace between the north and the south which has had an "uneasy peace" for several years. In the end the U.N. endorsed the election results and once again gave the win the Ouatarra, and that was the final say.
ReplyDeleteThis article didn't seem to be biased. They gave a lot of facts and information but didn't seem to be picking a side. There wasn't really a side to pick but they gave good information about the event.
I think that first off, the last President should not have still been in office if his term expired back in 2005. I also don't think he should have had any right to overturn the results and declare the regions that voted for Ouatarra fradualant. I think it is probably a step forward to have him out of office and hopefully it will lead to a more peaceful Africa.
Do you think that neighboring countries need to intervene when a President could possibly be corrupt?
Do you think that West Africa will be able to regain peace?
Cahill, Petra. "Deja vu all over again in Ivory Coast." World Blog. 3 Dec. 2010. Web.
In Response to Cassandra's "Muslim Women in U.S. Slowly Break Stereotypes"....
ReplyDeleteFirst thanks Cassandra for putting in this article!
I think it is amazing that muslin women in America are beginning to have a voice, and it is the epitome of what it means to be an American citizens. The strength gained by American muslim women is shared by all females around the globe. Our society will only benefit from having more voices and different perspectives. This will hopefully result in a step towards increased tolerance of differing religions.
In Response to Cassandra's article " Twin rivers schools given funding freedom"...
ReplyDeleteEducation right now is a huge issue in the United States as we are falling behind world standards. It is good that steps are being taken such as creating SSFR, yet the issue of inadequate schools will still be at large. The SSFR is "equally distributing resources, including effective teachers", when instead of shuffling around quality and poor teachers we need to be able to eliminate those incapable of performing up to standards. Although the SSFR is a step in the right direction, until teachers are made more accountable for their performance, education in the U.S. may not change.
Those who are going to have the biggest issue with the SSFR are those inside the teachers union, because they want their jobs protected.
All in all the United States needs to turn its attention to its education system, because there is no excuse for the United States to be ranked the 25th best-educated nation out of the 27 nations that have educational systems. People are ready and asking for change.
In response to Cassandra's "States across nations take aim at illegal immigration" ...
ReplyDeleteI have to disagree with Cassandra's comments on the article. The legislation is far from a watered down version of what Hitler did, as illegals are NOT being persecuted for their ethnicity or religion as Jewish people were, and illegals are not innocent as those who were persecuted during Hitlers reign. Illegal immigrants are breaking the United States' laws, and they must be held accountable as everyone else is expected to be. We can't just start picking and choosing which laws to enforce, or else people will simple start picking and choosing which laws to abide by. Machiavelli said that you must enforce laws and punishments, because otherwise the masses will be ungovernable. The reason the United States is a safe country is because the justice system is consistently fair and unwavering, and this results in a civilized society.
The states that are passing legislation to punish illegals are doing so in an effort to wake up the federal government and show that illegal immigration is a problem and needs solving. Individual states have noticed the lack of response on the park of the federal government, so they have taken on the issue instead of waiting. The states have a right to do this according to the 10th amendment which states " the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people". Because the federal government is not protected states from illegal immigration, it is left to them.
The States that are passing legislation to punish illegal activity are doing the right thing, and it will only make the United States a safer place to live.
In response to Noelle's article about the Ivory Coast....
ReplyDeleteNoelle I thought you had a very valid point about the government needing to accept the newly elected president and for Gbagbo to step down. If west africa expects to establish a democracy,they must have term limits and they must honor those term limits. One of the greatest aspects of a democracy is fair elections, thus the outcome of the recent election must be honored. It seems leaders in west africa have good intentions for there countrymen, but once in power they find it hard to let go.
As far as other countries interfering, it seems the aid is needed. Nations around the world are so advanced in comparison, it would be foolish to leave west africa to try and turn things around by themselves. Foreign aid is good at this point, and probably necessary even. The world is rooting for Africa to create an uncorrupt government and to offer its citizens safety.
Response to Noelle's African president........
ReplyDeleteThe president who stayed in control was definatly corrupting the government and that is not right. I think sometimes it is appropriate for other countries to step in and help their neighbor. Sometimes countries and their government are so corrupt that they need more than just civilian help to overthrow it. I think that once the people figure out how to accept election results and adapt to them more, peace will start to come. For them to regain peace though might take awhile and alot of effort from the new government.
"Its Workers Aging, Japan Turns Away Immigrants" By Hiroko Tabuchi
ReplyDeleteIn this article, it explains how the Japanese basically do not want immigrants working in their country. One industry that has cracked down on their immigrant workers is medical. Before they decided to cut the foreign doctors and nurses, there were programs where doctors from other countries could come and work to make money. Now the foreign nurses are required to take a test in Japanese that is said to be close to impossible. Only 3 out of 600 nurses from Indonesia and the Phillipines have passed the test so far. Although Japan is starting to experience worker shortages due to them ageing, they keep discouraging foreign workers. The government in Japan is actually hurting their economy by discouraging the younger workers. Experts say that in order for Japan to survive they need over seas workers for all the people in their country. Many foreigners went to school in Japan so they could find a job out of college in Japan. But even those chances are slim. So now they have seen decreased numbers of foreign students wanting to come to Japan for the schooling opportunities. Barriers in Japan make it very difficult for immigrants to get a job in Japan, not just in the medical field but also in the farming industry. With the population of Japan also declining, the country could be in a huge downturn if it can't fix their immigration policies.
This article could be biased because the man who wrote it might be one who turned off by these actions. He also maybe Japanese and could be totally rebelling aginst the country right now. He night also not want the country to go into an economic downturn so is encouraging immigrant workers to fight back.
I think that Japan needs to be more willing to work with its foreign workers not only becuase they need them to survive but also becuase that would be the generous thing to do since those workers are going to school in Japan. Nost of the workers are coming to Japan looking for salvation becuase they are from poor third world countries.
What do you think Japan's government should do?
Whose side would you be on?
Why would you support them?
The New York Times January 2, 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/03/world/asia/03japan.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp
In response to cherie's article about japan's immigration policies:
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with cherie about Japan needing to be more willing to work with foreigners. In our world today, it doesn't work when a country simply cuts itself off from the rest of the world. Countries should help share people and resources to keep both countries' economy growing. I feel that it's especially unfair because they have no reason to discourage foreigners if their population is decreasing and there are worker shortages. More immigrants would expand Japan's economy and bring the population up. Other countries allow Japanese immigrants to get jobs and make a living, so Japan should do the same to the rest of the world. Isolating themeselves from the rest of the world is not going to solve Japan's population problems. They should reevaluate their immigration policy to expand opporunitites for immigrants.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"Arrests in Russia Signal Divisions Over Dissent"
ReplyDeleteThe article reports an arrest of 70 people in Moscow Russia on New Year’s Eve for protesting restrictions on freedom of assembly. The group’s leader, Boris Y. Nemtsov, was arrested and later sentenced to 15 days in jail. Other protesters received similar sentences. The arrests occurred even though the Moscow City Hall has allowed the protest to take place. This brings up disagreements within Russia’s government over how to deal with this new opposition to the government. Usually protests such as this were subdued right away. However, recently the Russian government had allowed protests to occur on the last day of months with 31 days. Reports of the arrest claim that the group arrested were part of a separate unsanctioned rally trying to get the other rally to move into the city. Reports regarding Nemtsov’s arrest say he was arrested for public swearing and resisting arrest. However, in a video of the rally, Nemtsov is heard saying “calm down” and waves to the crowd as he is escorted into the police van. In his trial, the judge wouldn’t allow the video to be used as evidence and dismissed Nemtsov’s request for a chair for the 5 hour trial. Later on a group of 20 people were arrested for protesting their support for Nemtsov.
There is not much bias in the article, the author doesn’t state his opinions just facts on what happened.
When I read this it just reminded me how lucky we are to have a Bill of Rights in our government. Whereas in America we were granted the right to assemble peacefully 200 years ago, Russia is still struggling to obtain that right.
-How would you react to this news if you were a Russian citizen?
-What is a way to get the Russian government to allow peaceful protests?
“Arrests in Russia Signal Divisions Over Dissent”
By MICHAEL SCHWIRTZ
January 3, 2011
New York Times.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/04/world/europe/04russia.html?ref=world
In response to Noelle’s Ivory Coast artice:
ReplyDeleteI think that neighboring countries should intervene if they believe a country’s president is corrupt. It’s part of their duty to help a neighboring country if they are in need of assistant. If they turned their back to them would only make the problem worse and the conflict would later spread over to other countries. I agree with Noelle that he shouldn’t have been allowed to be in office 6 years after his term expired. I feel like he only claimed those regions were fraudulent to further his stay in office. With this new president I think that could be the start of a new change of peace in Africa.
"Birthright Citizenship Looms as Next Immigration Battle"
ReplyDeleteI know we have had quite a few article written on illegal immigration and the right to gain citizenship. This particular article i read was about the children who are born in the United States by illegal immigrants and still are able to get instant citizenship. It told the story of one women who illegally crossed the border with scissors with her in case she was to give birth and need to cut the umbilical cord. There have been quite a few women who cross the border in the later stages of pregnancy hoping to not get caught and give their child a better chance. The lawmakers have come up with a possible idea of creating 2 birth certificates: one for children born in the U.S. by American citizens, and the other for children born by illegal immigrants. In the 14th amendment it states that anyone born in the United States has the right to citizenship, but this does not apply to the parents. So if the parents get caught, they are deported, and the child stays. Not until the age of 21 can the child file paperwork for citizenship of the parents. in 2008 alone, 340,000 children were born to illegal immigrants and still granted citizenship. Another suggestion that has been made is that the children should be deported as well as the parents until the citizenship policy is changed. Only a few countries grant the right of citizenship if born on that countries land. A decision is supposed to be made January 5th, (tomorrow) regarding what to do in order to fix this problem.
This article seemed to be a little bit biased against the right to citizenship for just being born here even though the parents are not citizens. It gave a lot of good information from both sides regarding the matter but in the end it seemed like there was a little bit more against it.
I feel like America really has to do something about all the immigration problems and about this. I don't think it is right that the parents are taken away from the child, but i also am against illegal immigration so i think it is a tough decision.
Should all children born on American soil gain citizenship?
If so, what should we do about all the children whose parents are deported?
Should we revise the 14th amendment of the constitution which states, " “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” gain citizenship?
BY: Marc Lacey
January 4, 2011
NewYorkTimes.com
"On Immigration, Birthright Fight in U.S. Is Looming"
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/05/us/politics/05babies.html?_r=1&ref=world
In response to nlathatm's Afghanistan war post:
ReplyDeleteI think that President Obama said a lot of things about the war, and pulling out of the war, during his campaign without truly grasping the significance of these decisions. Now that he is being put on the spot, and held accountable for what he's bee saying he is unsure of what to actually do. The war may have reached a point in which it is no longer winnable, because of a combination of the predicament we have gotten into, and the conflicting expectations that Americans have about "winning" the war.
"Congress to Return With G.O.P. Vowing to Alter Rules"
ReplyDeleteOn Wednesday Republican John Boehner will become the house representative, and he wants to bring some changes to the way bills become legislation. House members will vote on Wednesday on changes that will increase transparency of lawmaking, and according to the author "consolidate Republican power over the budget process". Boehner wants do a number of things: do away with large omnibus spending bills, break them into smaller bills, allow for more amendments on bills generally, and allow for more extensive debate. People presenting bills will have to say how they will pay for the bill if passes and where the Constitution gives such authority. All bills will have to be placed online for public viewing three days before it is brought to the house.
The author was very bias against John Boehner and Republican ideals for changes in the House. She is obviously a democrat, and she believes in what the House was doing before the new House was assembled.
My thoughts are that making government more transparent is always a good thing. One of the 15 elements of democracy is transparency, and it is one of the reason our government functions without taking over society completely. I don't understand how the author can say the efforts of Republicans in the House to make law making more transparent is negative. Also Boehner's goal is for each bill to be explained on grounds of how it will be paid for and where in the constitution it gives the authority to pass the law. This is a great idea as we need government to take responsibility for the bills they pass and to actually think where money can come from besides tax payers. I agree with all the Republicans modification mentioned in the article; yet I also agree with the author that most of these changes will not stay as they were promised during elections.
Some things to consider:
What would the law-making process become if every new House of Reps. modifies it?
How do we trust our government and know a bill is what they say a bill is?
Jennifer Steinhauer
The New York Times
January 4th
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/05/us/politics/05rules.html?_r=1&hp
West chides Russia over ex-tycoon Khodorkovsky trial
ReplyDeleteDecember 30th 2010, BBC NEWS
Currently in Russia, the trial of Mikhail Khodorkovsky is being conducted. The former Russian oil tycoon is being charged for embezzlement and money laundering, (having already being found guilty in an earlier trial for tax evasion and fraud and is nearing the end of an 8 year sentence). A second trial involving the embezzlement and money laundering charges was enforced because the former president of Russia, Vladimir Putin demanded it. Throughout the trial, defense lawyers were unable to question witnesses, and the fairness of the trial is iffy. Currently the United States is offering input to the Russians regarding this matter as an example of the corruption and weakness of the Russian government. Now they didn’t say those exact words, but clearly the separation of powers, with the former president residing over the trial is lacking. But should the United States have any say in a different government’s judicial and executive decision? Should the United States be allowed to contradict the case of Khodorkovsky, when the Russian government had already completed their trial? In my opinion, I believe that the Russians should be able to make judicial decisions without the chidings of the United States. We should only offer advice if it is asked for, not offer it when it is clearly the wrong thing to do. If all the U.S. does is tell Russia what they are doing wrong and how bad Russia is doing it, then our tentative alliance with Russia will most likely begin to deteriorate.
Morghan Islip
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12097060
In response to Cherie’s article on Japanese immigration:
ReplyDeleteThe global economy is a ‘huge deal’ nowadays. Limiting foreign workers is not a good way of improving relations with foreign countries. By cutting off foreign workers, Japan can make those countries less likely to accept your own workers and more likely to slow or cut off trade with Japan or increase their fees. Now, Japan might not consider this is such a bad thing, but countries limiting their economic interactions with other countries take a great hit. Not only is it harder to increase the nation’s economic wealth, but also is slows down the competitive edge of business. This leaves the consumers at a loss. Furthermore, cutting off trade with other countries slows down the improvement of technology, business strategies, labor techniques, productivity, etc. In addition to the clear economic losses caused by lack of trade, there is also a loss in the sense of labor. By turning away foreigners, Japan loses a valuable group of workers who would benefit their businesses that the Japanese themselves may not provide. Labor diversity provides workers with different skill sets, multiple perspectives, improved collaboration potential, and a different understanding of new things.
With a world so intertwined, it is imperative that countries work together to improve each other and themselves. Countries that do not participate in the global economy are clearly less developed and less wealthy than those who do. Although Japan is very stable on its own right now, if its government policies continue to isolate the nation, its advances will slow compared to the rest of the world and it would eventually lag behind. With this perspective, it seems clear that the government should pull out of the economy and wash its hands clean while there is minimal loss.
“Netanyahu asks U.S. to free convicted spy”
ReplyDeleteOn Tuesday, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, made an appeal for the release of American Jonathan Pollard, who was sentenced to life imprisonment after spilling classified information to Israeli about Iraq and other government top secret topics. Netanyahu and Israeli feel that the sentence was too harsh and that he has served his time. "I believe that a new request for clemency is highly appropriate" says Netanyahu in a letter to Barack Obama regarding his request for releasing Pollard. Earlier appeals for his release occurred in 1995, and Netanyahu himself visited Pollard in prison in 2002. Two weeks ago, Pollard asked Netanyahu to make another request to Obama. The timing of the request comes during stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace talks which have some analysts wondering if the two events might be related. Netanyahu’s people would make no comment regarding the timing.
I think the author has a slight bias because it seems like he doesn’t want Pollard to be released and feels there is a connection because peace talks and the timing of the appeal.
I feel that Pollard should be released after 25 years because life imprisonment sounded like a harsh sentence. Although he was a traitor, he didn’t commit murder and therefore I feel like a life sentence is too harsh and that he’s done his time.
-Should Pollard be released from prison?
-Is the timing of the appeal related to stalled peace talks between Israeli-Palestinian?
“Netanyahu asks U.S. to free convicted spy”
By MARK LAVIE
January 4, 2011
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40913610/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa
In response to Morghan's Khodorkovsky trial:
ReplyDeleteI believe that the United States should not interfere with Russia's trial of Khodorkovsky. It's not our place to say whether their judgement was right or wrong in the trial. Although the trial did not follow democratic ways, and we see that as unfair it's still not our business. The trial was also held for a Russian citizen, not an American. It's his country's job to hold a trial for him and the United States shouldn' be a part of that process. Russia doesn't try to interefere with trials held by the US Sumpreme Court, so we should not try to do the same to them. I agree with Morghan too in that by interefering we may cause unsteadyness with our alliance with Russia.
“China Rolls out its first stealth Aircraft”
ReplyDeleteNews gets out that apparenly China is ready to stage a runway test for their first ever radar-evading stealth fighter on an airbase near Beijing, however, China’s media tried to play down the aircraft’s capabilities and say that the runway tests were rumors. The aircraft is being called J-20 and the editor of Kanwa Defense Weekly in Hong Kong said in a telephone interview on Wednesday that he had been authoritatively told that the jet will make its first test flight on Thursday. He said Chinese officials deliberately let word escape of the aircrafts tests and wanted them to become public. Our Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates is set to arrive in Beijing on Sunday to meet his Chinese equivalent resuming top-level military discussions that have been all but stopped since the White House announced a $6 billion arms sale to Taiwan last January 29th. The editor of Kanwa Defense Weekly, Mr. Chang, said that they want to show the US and Mr. Gates just how strong they are. Right now China is experiencing superior growth and progression with much of it centered on improving air, sea, and space capabilities. Chinese military officials say their increase in air power is all defensive because they are looking to transform their armed forced from a domestic power to a regional and eventually a global standpoint just like the United States. Additionally the People’s Liberation Army Navy, the navy aspect of the military organization of China, is said to be building an aircraft carrier that could be deployed by 2020. Our head of the United States Pacific Command, Adm. Robert Willard, said that the aircraft carrier has reached an “initial operational capability,” however later Navy officials in China later denounced that comment saying they had a design, but hadn’t tested it yet. Evidently the J-20 is well behind both Russia’s T-50 jet and the two American stealth aircraft, the F-22 and F-35, in technical sophistication and radar-evading ability. Mr. Chang even elaborated that the J-20’s engine is nowhere near the superiority of its competitors. Although the J-20 looks like it has the ability to carry larger weapons than the F-22 and could be refuled in midair. The Chinese said that they would probably need a good decade to produce the J-20 in large numbers and Mr. Chang concluded that their military would probably need an additional 10 or 15 years to develop their stealth fighter to be even considered equivalent to the models in the United States or Russia.
It seems to me that either the Chinese are trying to be one up on the United States, or that they are in awe of our accomplishments and are trying to woo us over by praising our great aircraft achievements…The bias I got from this article was that every time a snippet of Chinese military information got to the public, they would amend the comment and either say it wasn’t true, or that it was only a plan and nothing was set in stone…There is a bit of secrecy in the mysterious Mr. Chang I am beginning to think! Ahhh! This would make a stellar movie plot: the Chinese are secretely launching an aircraft plot to take over the world by bringing down the big boys, Russia and then the United States! As if our children really were smarter than theirs….just kidding…But yeah it seemed that the article was trying to play down any ahcievemnts that the Chinese were making with their J-20.
Other students might be thinking:
Wow this person is off their rocker, or Why are the Chinese suddenly wanting to improve their military tools so badly? Or, Why cant the Chinese become good at soemthing other than computers and being super duper smart, let them excell in their air crafts! Or, Why do Chinese officials always play down their abilities and pretend its no big deal? Are they possibly hiding something??
China Rolls Out Its First Stealth Aircraft
By MICHAEL WINES
Published: January 5, 2011
The New York Times, Global Edition, Asia Pacific
Benjamin Haas and Xiyun Yang contributed research
ooops I forgot the website url
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/world/asia/06china.html?_r=1&ref=global-home
“Mocked as Uncool, the Minivan Rises Again”
ReplyDeletePart 1)
This article begins by saying what everyone in America says about minivans: SOCCERMOM! It describes the epitomy of a vehicle that any mother would drive, it has 7 seats for her 12 children, 5 dogs, 30 groccery bags and so much more…So honestly the last thing that would ever cross anyone’s mind about a minivan is it being “cool”….HOWEVER! Automakers are desperately trying to make the minivan appeal to everyone, even if they don’t have 12 kids and 5 dogs. Now parents that rap to hip-hop music have minivans, secret agents with cat masks have minivans, heavy metal rockers have minivans, and come on, even Godzilla has a minivan. Minivan makers are trying to remold the minivan into something more than a mom-mobile and something that parents can be proud of! Or possibly just less ashamed of driving. Toyota led the campaign for cool vans last spring with its commercial of rapping parents rolling through the culdesacs with their gang of kids in their “Swaggah Wagon.” Richard Bame, Toyota’s national marketing manager, has heard that some moms feel lost with their identity if they have a minivan. They feel if they buy a van they will immidiately feel grouped into the breakfast on the go/throw it in the van/pile em all in mommy category. Other automakers beside Toyota have ben following suit, and Honda’s new advertisement for their new Odyssey 2011 is through the temptation of loooovvveeee. Apparently an Odyssey “beckons like no van before” as the commerical displays a couple seeking a romatic night when, OMG! They come across an all new 2011 Odyssey in a beautiful park which slides its doors open to reveal sensual rose petals simply spilling out, and chocolate covered strawberries in a cooler compartment and a nice warm fire crackling on the rear-seat video screen. If that didn’t make you want to buy a van, than I don’t know what could! Additionally, minivans are now aimed at fathers who are looking for a sporty new “man van” to ride around town in, I mean pick the kids up from school in…
Part 2)
ReplyDeleteChrysler plans to offer a high-powered version of its 2011 Dodge Grand Caravan, to be aimed at fathers. And Ford Motor, which stopped making minivans in 2006, is jumping back into the game with the compact C-Max. The seven-passenger vehicle is about two feet shorter than the Odyssey and Sienna and offers high-tech features to really wet your whistle. Ford hopes the C-Max will appeal to people who appreciate the practical-ness of the European design without the unflattering minivan label. Recent years have shown automakers trying to make their vans more kid friendly with dual-screen entertainment systems and reconfigurable seating, however, they are now trying to appeal more to adults who have shied away from the vehicles because of their connotations. Nearly every minivan sold in the United States was redesigned in 2010 to offer flashier looks, more advanced technology and a sportier ride, yeah. Making minivans seem “hip” might be a stretch, but they are making dividends. Analysts credit the Toyota campaign with helping to increase sales of the Sienna by 18.5% and Sales of the Honda Odyssey are up 42% since October, when the 2011 model and new ad campaigns were introduced. More and more families are beginning to discover that “most crossovers, which provide the capacity of a sport utility vehicle or minivan but are generally smaller and have four hinged doors, offered less cargo space and lower fuel economy.” They make more sense to families with younger kids and Mr. Tobias at the Weymouth Honda dealership in Boston says that the new design has changed a lot of people’s minds about owning a van.
I have mostly added my own sarcastics into this explanation of the article, but basically it is saying that if you give something usual a facelift and call it something else and endorse “cool” things with it, then people are going to be awakened and come to like it.
ReplyDeleteOther students might ask why in the world was this in the New York Times? Or, Why do they need to spice up vans because they were already super awesome! Or, Could this possibly mean that my mom will want to buy a van too? Or, Why don’t they just film Kim Kardashian driving a van, then everysingle male in the world will buy one…
I think the author wanted to support the recent van craze, because maybe his wife just had a baby and they had to go out and buy a van...I dont see why all this hype is over vans being so gross anyways! They are super functional because if you wanted to, you could live in one! And they can be taken anywhere, its not like they're these huge tank-like diesel trucks that cant fit in a regular parking spot, they are sleek useful vehicles that so many families have depended on for years. Hail the van I say!
By NICK BUNKLEY
Published: January 3, 2011
The New York Times, Global Edition, Business Day
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/04/business/04minivan.html?src=busln
“Math That Moves: Students Embrace the iPad”
ReplyDeleteA rising number of schools across the nation are welcoming the ipads as the latest tools to teach Math through tutorials and problem solving annimation, History with Jeopardy like games, and English through digital readings. Some schools like Roslyn High School on Long Island handed out 47 iPads on Dec. 20 to the students and teachers in two humanities classes. The school district hopes to provide iPads eventually to all 1,100 of its students. The iPads cost $750 apiece, and they are to be used in class and at home during the school year to replace textbooks, allow students to correspond with teachers and turn in papers and homework assignments, and preserve a record of student work in digital portfolios. All the ipad hype may seem a surprise at a time when school districts are trying to get their budgets approved so they don’t have to lay off teachers or cut programs. Spending money on ipads is kind of an extravagance and is viewed as unneccesary to some. There is not even factual evidence yet whether ipads really do increase test scores or actually help children learn better. Larry Cuban, a professor at Stanford University, claims the money that is being spent on ipads should be going towards valuable training for teachers. In addition to the ipads thousands of educational apps, its size and weight make it popular among kids who usually have backpacks with heavy books inside. Roslyn administrators also said their adoption of the ipad, for which the district paid $56,250 for the initial 75 was advancing its effort to go paperless and cut spending. Wow, best thing that hit education technology since the overhead projector. The New York City public schools have ordered more than 2,000 ipads, for $1.3 million and more than 200 Chicago public schools applied for 23 district-financed iPad grants totaling $450,000. The Virginia Department of Education is overseeing a $150,000 ipad initiative that has replaced history and AP biology textbooks at 11 schools. And six middle schools in four California cities are teaching the first ipad-only algebra course, developed by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. People in opposition of the ipad say that you can do the exact same things with existing off-the-shelf technology for 400 dollars less. Some say its just not a priority in present day education, even if it does save some money on printing and textbook costs.
“Math That Moves: Students Embrace the iPad” ---------2nd part
ReplyDeleteI felt the author of this article recognized the pros and cons of buying ipads for schools, and agreed with the pros side more. If all students across America used ipads then there would be basically no need for excess paper, and maybe if they invented some grading device on the ipad, then teachers would more than ever persuade their school districts to invest in them. I am personally on whatever side the teachers are on. They are the ones who spend countless hours grading papers and essays and teaching, if they think that technology like the ipad would help, then we should probably get them. But not in my lifetime is Del Oro going to even consider that, HA no way José! It was just a thought! Jeez!... But I feel that the author of this article has my same opinions. If they help the people in the schools, then lets do it.
Other students may be thinking, well there is no way ordinary schools like Del Oro for example, has the budget even to give an ipad to only the english teachers! No way are they ever going to rally up all their money and buy every single student one! And what about the costs if students break them or lose them? What happens then? Is their like a deposit that people have to pay in order to use one for school? And what would be realllllly cool, is if all the educational apps were free. Then the school wouldn’t have to pay any additional fees for 5 dollar apps. And where does this leave children in other countries that still don’t even have proper desks for school? Maybe our country with our excess should help underpriviledged students?? Well, all those books that we’d be unable to use could be given to other students in other countries…I don’t know, just a thought.
post-gazette.com News/Education
Wednesday, January 05, 2011
By WINNIE HU, The New York Times
First published on January 5, 2011 at 12:01 am
This article originally appeared in The New York Times
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11005/1115644-298.stm?cmpid=localstate.xml
In response to Caitlin's post Netanyahu aks US to free convicted spy:
ReplyDeleteI do think Pollard should be released from prison. He has been behind bars for 25 years and I think thats quite enough time for someone who spied for Israel. Its not like he killed someone or even raped someone. Those are way way way more serious crimes and the creeps that commit those delinquencies should be removed from the earth for all I care. Its sad how our society will sentence someone to life imprisonment for treason, but wont necessarily do that for someone that raped some poor little girl. It makes me sick to think that some day when that criminal is 80 years old, he will once again walk the streets, and who knows, prey on someone else. Pollard didn't do nearly as bad a crime in my eyes, so he should be released because he has naturally payed the required price.
I do think its unfortunate that this request for release comes at a time when Israeli and American ties are not quite the strongest, but sometimes that happens. I know it probably made some American Jews wonder whether to side with America or Israel.... That could become uncomfortable, but I don't think those decisions will affect the long term anymore than if America wasn't having a small clash with Israel.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repealed
ReplyDeleteSaturday, December 18th, the Senate convened to vote on the Don't Ask Don't Tell law which prohibits homosexual individuals from serving openly in the armed forces. The law was overturned by a vote 65 to 31 with 8 Republicans joining the Democratic platform. In compliance with his 2008 campaign promises, president Obama signed the bill in hopes to further social equality and the disappearance of discrimination.
This article discusses more of the successes of President Obama thus far in office than of the possible repercussions of the law itself. Clearly the author felt the overturning of the law a great step, even boasting Obama's social accomplishments as much greater then those of President Clinton who had many of the same goals.
As much as this is a great stride against discrimination, I can't help but wonder how much good it will actually do gay soldiers once they are deployed. The law should never have been enacted, but it was supposed to keep gay individuals from being persecuted by what is generally a very conservative view in the armed forces. I'm not at all in support of a law which fosters discrimination, but repealing the law may not be any better for the people affected. Though I support Obama's goal to eliminate discrimination in the U.S., this law isn't about the president or his campaign promises. Repealing the law was great, it just may not help with the attitude shared by much of the armed forces.
Will the law encourage more individuals to join the armed forces?
Do openly gay people still have to worry about persecution regardless of the law?
Will this law help create greater tolerance within the armed forces?
oh right source...
ReplyDeleteLA Times: "Don't ask, don't tell repeal signed by Obama" by Peter Micholas, December 23, 2010
In response to Sara's post:
ReplyDeleteI understand where you are coming from with your concerns for openly gay soldiers, and I think they do have some grounds. On the other hand, most people who are openly gay experience discrimination in all sorts of situations, public and private. With experiences behind them, they probably know what to expect and, from what I've read about the campaign to repeal the policy, would rather be able to serve their country who they are without hiding anything then concealing themselves and being accepted my more people. That being said, no one is forcing gay soldiers to come out. Many people may simply continue serving their country without ever feeling the need to out themselves, in order to prevent discrimination. I agree that this may cause some repercussions, but it ultimately opens more opportunities and gives more freedom of choice.
In response to Ciara's “China Rolls out its first stealth Aircraft” article:
ReplyDeleteChina has been right on the tail of the U.S. for years now gunning to be the next world superpower. There's no question in my mind that China is trying to mimic American technology and, eventually, improve upon it, surpassing our own capabilities in military aircrafts, weaponry and elsewhere. China has always wanted to improve their technology in all areas, and now with the increased usage of foreign products by the U.S. they certainly have the means to do so. I think there could be many reasons that Chinese officials release minimal information on new creation. It could be that their air crafts are more advanced than they want us to know, that they don't want their designs to be shared with other nations, or maybe that they just haven't figured everything out quite yet. I agree that it is a bit suspicious that every statements is amended or withdrawn but we have to remember that although China has a capitalist economy, their society is still under communist rule and censorship is normal. If their aircraft really is behind the technology of our own aircrafts, then they should continue to be for a while.
Desperately seeking a drug that would allow them to execute a death row inmate last fall, California prison officials scoured the nation for a dose of it, calling dozens of hospitals, local surgery centers, the Department of Veterans Affairs and other states for help, newly released documents show. The documents, released late Tuesday as a result of a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union, reveal new details of how California sought to cajole the governor of Texas to lend the state a supply of sodium thiopental. At one point, California considered buying a batch from a supplier in Pakistan, previously released documents state.The planned execution of Albert Greenwood Brown, which set off the search, never took place. California eventually bought a British supply of the drug for $36,415, but details of that transaction remain secret. The ACLU has contended the state cannot use a foreign-made supply of the drug without the approval of the federal Food and Drug Administration.
ReplyDeleteThe agency confirmed it was releasing the British shipment to California without reviewing the drug "to determine their identity, safety, effectiveness, surety or any other characteristics." The ACLU disputes whether that drug can legally be used in future executions – none is currently scheduled – and believes it's an issue that will be addressed in court, said Natasha Minsker, death penalty policy director for the ACLU's Northern California branch.
The ACLU disputes whether that drug can legally be used in future executions – none is currently scheduled – and believes it's an issue that will be addressed in court, said Natasha Minsker, death penalty policy director for the ACLU's Northern California branch.
The nationwide shortage of sodium thiopental, a fast-acting barbiturate that is the first of three drugs administered in lethal injection executions, has bedeviled corrections officials nationwide as they seek to put condemned inmates to death.
The U.S. maker of the drug has said it will not be able to manufacture new batches until early this year and has made it clear to states that it opposes the anesthetic's use in executions. That set off international searches for the drug by states seeking to put inmates to death.
Things to consider:
If the US manufacturer delays production and does not want the drug used in execution, could the two factor be related? Also, could the government charter another company to make the drug more efficiently, so they could avoid going out of the nation to obtain it?
What happened with the Arizona shipment?Why did that fall through?
If the nation is on such unsteady grounds with the middle east, why did we consider buying the drug from Pakistan? Does the government not have more pressing matters to worry about?
-Rebecca MIon
ReplyDeleteIn response to Ciara's iPad post:
ReplyDeleteI think, as much as it could be beneficial to put iPads in schools, it's simply unrealistic. Many schools, especially public ones, can barely afford books for every student let alone iPads which cost considerably more. And the truth is that most of the country doesn't have excess. As rich as people think the United States is, many fail to realize the we are in almost $10 trillion of debt and continue deficit spending. Schools suffer heavily from the financial crisis. School boards should be concerned with getting enough teachers and essential school supplies before splurging on some cool new technology. It would be difficult even with iPads to go paperless. We can't seem to go paperless which much more powerful computers at our disposal. And as much as children in other countries lack, we still have to deal with schools in the United States that haven't gotten up-to-date textbooks in years. Maybe some schools would be able to handle the transition, but not many of them.
In response to “Netanyahu asks U.S. to free convicted spy”:
ReplyDeleteI believe that a life sentence is appropriate for Pollard. He committed treason to his country. This is the highest offense one can commit against his or her country and i believe it deserves a befitting punishment. A traitor at this high a level is unforgivable. I don't believe Netanyahu's intentions are out of principle but rather due to guilt. However, I don't believe the push for his release is in any way related to the stalled peace talks because Pollard already leaked the secrets.
Hi guys!(actually I guess this is kinda an all girl class haha)Its Seth Ahlquist.
ReplyDelete"Dominican Republic Back to Deporting Haitians"
Basically this article from the Associated Press is reporting that the Dominican Republic is having its first official crackdown on the illegal Haitians residing there. More than 700 Haitians have been deported since Monday, with more expected soon. Part of this effort is to stop the spread of cholera, which has killed more than 3,150 people in Haiti and the Dominican Republic since October. Since the earthquake it is estimated that the number of illegal Haitians in the Dominican Republic has risen from 600,000 to 1 million.
First of all, I see very limited bias in this article due to the fact that it merely reports statistics and information while not advancing a certain viewpoint or agenda of the author.
I think that the earthquake in Haiti was obviously a very unfortunate occurrence, however I think a year may be enough time for the Haitians to get back on their feet. I don't think that racial profiling is fair, but I don't think there is a way around it. It isn't compassionate but I believe that the Dominican has the right to do what they want in their own country.
Is one year enough time for the Haitians to recover and return home? Is there a way around the racial profiling that is occurring? What is more important protecting one's borders or the human rights of other countries' citizens?
This article was from the Sac Bee website and was published today, January 6th: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/01/06/3305126/dominican-republic-back-to-deporting.html
"What's to blame for AT&T outages?"
ReplyDeleteThis LA Times article addresses the slew of power outages that plagued Southern California as a result of the recent extreme storms. The article cites one AT&T customer in particular that lost service to his home/work phone, fax line, Internet, and television from Christmas Day to January 3rd. The article went on to explore the lack of immediate solution on AT&T’s part, only briefly mentioning the outages of two other telecommunications companies. A shortage of available skilled workers was suggested as the main cause of the delayed response and insufficient maintenance as a contributor to the extent of damage. Two anonymous AT&T workers were interviewed about these causes. They claimed that AT&T’s hundreds of recent layoffs were the underlying issue of the severity of the outages, which was countered in a few lines by a company executive who said the number of workers declined with the number of wire-line phone customers. Though it was less of the article, the most striking observation of the writer was regarding the complete dependency of our current society on multimedia access. He used the example of the far-reaching gravity of such outages to underline our pervasive reliance on these technologies and the devastation that can be caused by simple, short-term isolation.
I think that there was a clear aspect of bias against AT&T in this article, perhaps because of their success. The company may have been the subject of the article, but the extensive outages of the other local phone companies were almost blatantly ignored. With the amount of print dedicated to the interviews of disgruntled AT&T workers, a fair case wasn’t made for the company’s actions. The article merely chastised the company for making lucrative profits and not employing as many people in this field as the writer deemed appropriate.
I think that, despite the writer’s position, AT&T seemed to be in the right in this situation. The storms in Southern California were extreme, unexpected, and completely out of character for the area. They shouldn’t be expected to keep enough skilled workers on payroll to handle such an emergency case. Until a lack of available workers is proven to be a chronic, recurring problem for AT&T subscribers, I think we should cut the company some slack for not being as prepared as a couple of Eagle Scouts.
-Do you think that the emergency nature of the storms is enough reason to let AT&T off the hook for their delayed responses?
-Do you consider our society completely dependent on communication technology? Why or why not?
-If the system failures affected wireless communication instead of land lines, would that change the expected response?
-How would you respond to 10 days without cell service? What about the entire state? The country?
This article, by David Lazarus, was posted through the Los Angeles Times on January 6, 2011.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-0107-lazarus-20110107,0,3351509,full.column
In response to Cassandra's "Boomers, health care" post:
ReplyDeleteI think there will end up being enough senior care available, in the form of care homes and facilities, by the time there is a need for it. Already we can see job opportunities and health care approaches changing because of the growing elderly population. I think that this development will continue as senior demands go up, which your article focuses on in regards to Medicare. Because of this, it seems to me that there shouldn't be too much of a worry about resources and facilities for the elderly as long as services continue to adapt and expand.
As for question about whether it's a good thing or a bad thing to live a long time, that's a really hard one to answer. Ethically and ideally, I think that living a long time is something to strive for and that old age should be treasured. People should be able to harness all the medical marvels and know-how of our day to maximize their life. Perpetuating their personal history is valuable to our society as it develops. However, I have a really hard time considering long lives to be simply a good thing. In a lot of ways, a large populace of uncontributing old people is a burden to society and to our health care systems. The tax dollars of younger, healthier generations are forced to support the physical degeneration of the biggest batch of elderly in our country's history. In an economic and somewhat harsh sense, living a long time can be considered a very bad thing.
In response to Sara's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" post:
ReplyDeleteThe repeal of this legislation was definitely a big deal, but I agree that it shouldn't be considered a big deal for Obama as much as for the men and women it affects. I think that the law probably will encourage people to join the armed forces because gay soldiers are still allowed to "not tell", they just are no longer required not to. The only thing that's changed is the communication to all military members and homosexuals alike that it's okay for people to be honest about who they are in their profession, in service of the country. I do think that openly gay people in the military will still face persecution due to the general macho, conservative nature of the occupation and programs. However, I think this act of Congress is a positive step toward developing greater tolerance within our armed forces, expecially in the field of sexual orientation.
In response to Sara's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repealed"
ReplyDeleteWhile Sara makes a good point that repealing the law may not actually help homosexuals, but rather create another opportunity for others to judge them, I believe that Obama's stance on this law was necessary. If America continues to keep discriminatory laws, it will tarnish all the work that has been put towards equality. While this law may cause homosexuals more discrimination in places that they didn't have to worry about before, homosexuals who will want to enlist in later years will get to experience the benefits. This is because once the law has been in effect for a while and people get used to it, the homosexuals will no longer have to worry as much. I also believe that this law gives people who are gay a chance to express themselves so that they don't have to hide; however, if someone wishes to not speak about there sexuality, they can still keep quiet about it. By repealing this law, homosexuals now have a choice about openly expressing themselves. Those who feel confident enough can share their feelings, without fear of being punished. In regards to the amount of individuals joining the armed forces, I am afraid that it might actually lower the numbers. While more gays may enlist, they are a minority and there might be a higher population of men who refuse to enlist with homosexuals. Regardless of this law, I think that gays are always going to have to worry about persecution. This is true outside of the army as well. No matter where they go, they are faced with discrimination by people who don't understand their way of life or don't agree with it. Lastly, I think that in the armed forces, there will be greater tolerance only because it is the law. However, the discrimination that continues in the armed forces may be less obvious, but more personal, which is in some ways more hurtful.
In response to Seth's "Dominican Republic Back to Deporting Haitians"
ReplyDeleteThis event seems in a way similar to America's problem with the illegal immigration going on from Mexico, however in this case, the Haitians are immigrating because they have no where else to go since their homes were destroyed. While it may seem wrong that the Haitians are illegally immigrating to the Dominican Republic, I feel that they still don't have a stable place to live (even after a year), so there is nowhere else for them to go. I think in order for the Dominican Republic to transfer the Haitians out of their nation, they should know where to place the Haitians for relocation. Even after a year, I don't think Haiti is ready to become a living quarters for people. It takes many years for cities to be rebuilt. Especially because the government isn't advanced, it will takes a long time for them to recover from this natural disaster that ruined their nation. If this happened to America, which is more advanced due to the number of years the democracy has been in place, it would still take a long time to recover if an earthquake affected the whole nation. I don't think that there is a way around the racial profiling, however, because it is something that people naturally tend to do. While the Dominican Republic has the right to protect its borders, I think they should also think about others and decide if they can find somewhere safe that they can relocate the Haitians (or even if they can find a place for the Haitians to stay that is in there country away from their people). If the situation were reversed, I'm sure the Dominican Republic would like some help, instead of being kicked out of Haiti with no sympathy whatsoever.
According to an unofficial count by ADP (Automatic Data Processing), companies added nearly 300,000 jobs in December, which is more than in any month in the past decade. This report has created hope that America's unemployment rate might finally be starting to fall. There has been talk that the report could be inaccurate because ADP doesn't track the official government employment data. Others are saying that since these projected numbers were so high, there has to be evidence that employers are hiring.
ReplyDeleteIn order to keep up with the population growth and hold the unemployment rate stable, it takes about 125,000 new jobs a month. In order to reduce unemployment significantly, it takes at least 300,000 new jobs a month. So if the report is true we're just barely getting back on track for a stronger economy.
Last week, the Labor Department said that the number of people applying for unemployment benefits has fallen to its lowest point in the last two and a half years. This is another good sign. As well, large companies which have been resistant to hire full-time worker are starting to do so again. The nation's largest railroad company, Union Pacific, is planning to replace 4,000 workers who are set to retire in 2011. That is about 10 percent of its total staff.
Although all this sounds like good news, economists are still skeptic because ADP's numbers are especially questionable in December and during the holiday season. This is because some companies keep employees for tax purposes who have left and are no longer being paid on their payroll all year. This causes discrepancies in ADP's data.
Bias is practically nonexistent in this article. It is mostly a reporting of the data that has been recovered and the commentary of several economists.
I sure do hope the report by ADP is at least partially correct because our economy needs all the help it can get. We need our large companies to believe the economy is taking a turn for the better so they share their wealth and continue to hire more workers. I think that it is possible that the numbers could be off do to inconsistencies in the job market during the holiday season. It would be difficult to say the December job surge didn't have any effect on the data collected.
Consider:
-Do you think the report by ADP is inaccurate and unreliable?
-Is the December job surge completely throwing off the numbers?
-Do you think the economy is on its way to recovering?
Bomkamp, Samantha, and Mae Anderson. "Private Report: US Added 300,000 Jobs in December - FoxNews.com." FoxNews.com - Breaking News | Latest News | Current News. 5 Jan. 2011. Web. 07 Jan. 2011. .
In response to Emily's ADP Unemployment Observations Post:
ReplyDeleteI hesitate to put a lot of stock in ADP's findings, especially if economists are discounting the accuracy. I don't know exactly where the most discrepancies would be in the data, though they are definitely due in part to a holiday surge and maybe even tax manipulation. I do think, however imperfect the figures and measurements may be, they do seem to be pointing to our continued economic growth and recovery as a nation. Since September, the Dow, the Nasdaq, and the New York Stock Exchange have consistently shown significant gains in value, reflecting on the nation's economy as a whole. Because of this and because of findings like those discussed in Emily's article, I think it's safe to assume that the economy is on the right track to recovery as we continue to break out of any recessionary hold that may be left over from 2009.
In response to Bryn's response to Sara's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Post:
ReplyDeleteI think Bryn makes a lot of really good points in her response. I hadn't considered how the repealing of the law might discourage enlistment of potentially anti-gay soldiers. Homophobia will probably weigh in to some citizen's thoughts when considering joining the armed forces because of the recent change in policy, but it's hard to speculate how widespread that might be. With something so difficult to measure, it's going to be nearly impossible to ever determine the total effect on enlistment that this act of Congress will have. I also agree with Bryn on the idea that the spirit of the law is so important. Obama is making a bold legislative statement against discrimination in a time where it still pervades our society and our armed forces. That attitude is, admittedly, quite valuable, though I still maintain that the main success of this act is in relation to the men and women it directly affects.
As you all may know, there has been a budget cut in our nation's defense system. Secretary of Defense, Robert M. Gates announced that there will be a $78 billion cut in Pentagon spending over the next five years. More people oppose this cut than support it, 52%-44%. Democrats are more for supporting the defense cuts at 54% whereas Republicans are more against it where only 30% support the budget cuts. And independents roughly split at 50% against and 43% support.
ReplyDeleteThere is slight biased in this article because only people who have strong opinions are going to enter the poll. This is especailly true for people who have strong opinions about the war in Afghanistan because it plays a big role in setting budget priorities.
-Should the nation be making such drastic cuts in our defense system?
-Will these Pentagon budget cuts actually help reduce the federal budget deficit?
Craighill, Peyton M. "Behind the Numbers - Public's Take on Cutting Defense." Blog Directory (washingtonpost.com). 07 Jan. 2011. Web. 07 Jan. 2011. .
In response to Sara's "Don't Ask, Don't tell Repealed"
ReplyDeleteI think Sara makes a lot of great points; however I feel as though the law is there to help protect homosexuals not discriminate against them. Although it may seem like discrimination, it is almost best for the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law to be enacted as it will help protect against discrimination from other soldiers.
With the law being repealed I think it will turn many homosexuals away from joining the military. I think they will be more inclined to join the military with the Don't Ask, Don't Tell law in place. I can understand where Obama is coming from in trying to reduce discrimination; however, I don't think repealing this law was a postive step in doing so.
"House Clears Way For Healthcare Repeal Vote"
ReplyDeleteThe House recently cleared the way for the debate on legislation that would repeal the national healthcare overhaul. The House approved the terms of the debate on a 236-181 vote. Democrats accused Republicans of fiscal irresponsibility and protested the GOP's efforts to push along the repeal bill as quickly as possible. Republicans counter and say that the public has already made up its mind for repeal against national healthcare.
The repeal of the healthcare bill is projected to add $230 billion to the national deficit over the next 10 years. Although that is a large amount of money, I feel as if the repeal will help the country with its deficit in the long run. I think the healthcare bill will only cause a greater national deficit and should be repealed as it will benefit our nation.
According to a Gallup poll, 46% of Americans back the repeal and 40% oppose it. 78% of Republicans are in favor of backing the repeal and 64% are against the repeal. I feel as though the article had limited biased as it saw both sides of the story and the positve and negative effects of the repeal.
Sonmez, Felicia. "44 - House Clears Way for Health-care Repeal Vote." Blog Directory (washingtonpost.com). 07 Jan. 2011. Web. 07 Jan. 2011. .
In Response to Caitlin's "Arrests in Russia Signal Divisions Over Dissent"
ReplyDeleteI agree with Caitlin in that we are lucky to have a Bill of Rights here in America. If I were a Russian citizen and heard this news, I would be dissapointed. I think that Nemstov had every right to protest and that words were put into his mouth for his arrest. the fact that the judge did not allow the footage caught on tape to be presented in the court was wrong as it showed Nemstov doing the opposite of what authorities had stated. I think Russia needs to figure out its laws and set more clear boundries on protesting.
In respones to Ciara's “Math That Moves: Students Embrace the iPad” ---------2nd part
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ciara in the fact that it would be really cool, especially if having ipads for school made learning and teaching easier and more efficient. Having ipads for school would eliminate having all the heavy textbooks and binders students have to carry around. And I do agree we could donate all our unused textbooks and supplies to countires that have barely anything, that is if we were able to use ipads for school.
On the contrary, having ipads for school use could impose on students learning and paying attention in class. It would be possible for students to obtain game apps that they could play during class and act as if they were doing their work on the ipad. Also, as Ciara stated, how would the school manage damage fees and/or lost ipads? Well I think that it would be almost impossible for a school with 1700 kids to afford ipads as well as paying for the damage charges. I feel like parents may not all feel that having their kids be taught using ipads is best either and that they may not be recieving the best education for the price they are paying.
Although having ipads at school would be really cool and maybe even more efficient, I don't see it happening anywhere in the near future, unfortunately.
oops! I forgot some questions on my Health Care Repeal Post.
ReplyDelete-Although the repeal would put or nation in a greater deficit, would it actually help in the long run?
-Do you think most American's actually feel it is best to repeal the healthcare bill and why?
In response to Caitlin's “Netanyahu asks U.S. to free convicted spy”
ReplyDeletePollard is a traitor of America and therefore should face a punishment; however, life in prison may be a little much. Maybe Pollard was forced into telling secrets and information and had no choice? Pollard should have never told though and needs to serve time in prison. 25 years is a long time, but if we were to set him free, how could we be sure that he would not give more information or betray America again? Maybe Pollard has learned his lesson; however, if Obama decides to let him out of prison then he better be prepared to talk with him and make sure he knows what he did was wrong an that he is an American traitor. I just don't know if letting Pollard out of prison is the right thing to do?
In response to "What's to blame for AT&T outages?"
ReplyDeleteNo I don’t think that the emergency nature of the storms is enough reason to let AT&T off the hook for delayed response, because not only do they boast themselves as the biggest, most far reaching company (with a very extensive network), they also do have sufficient resources and capital to repair the damage. I definitely believe that our society is completely dependent on communication. This is evidenced not only in leisure socially with email and telephones, but in economics were it is a necessity to trading. When a certain level of communication is built up and then dropped off instantly the vast difference is can be devastating to society because people are used to a certain level. The response would indeed change if wireless communication failed; it would have a significantly quicker expected response. This is because of the way higher dependency of society on wireless communication as compared to outdated land lines. I would be really upset and probably complain to or switch cell services. I expect this sentiment would be shared throughout the country.
In response to Ciara’s iPad in schools:
ReplyDeleteAlthough it does clearly cost a good chunk of money, buying iPads isn’t at all a bad idea or waste of money. Eventually, all schools will use iPads or something similar. That’s just the way technology is. There’s no stopping it. Plus, I think it’s a good idea to go paperless: it saves money and the environment. Giving out the iPads helps students who wouldn’t be able to buy one themselves. So, as long as the schools have the money to spend, I see no problem with buying iPads.
What I wanna know is: How do they choose the students who get them? By who is least likely to break it? By the students who are struggling or top students? It doesn’t seem fair to allow some students to get access and others not.
*I think the iPad student-owners should be responsible for any damage done. They probably already are, having to sign some sort of agreement in order to use them which places them as liable. Or they simply pay to use them.
As for the children in other countries, I’m sure the U.S. sends plenty of aid to other countries already. Although we should help, it’s not our responsibility. We should only help countries who seek our aid. If that means we have someone go to places unable to reach us on their own, then okay. But let’s remember: There are places in the world who wish to remain tied to their traditions and ideals, and technology/books may not exactly coincide peacefully with those. Furthermore, I don't think we have an "excess" of anything yet. It is a very nice idea though.
In response to Sara’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repealed”.
ReplyDeleteWould the law have helped create greater tolerance within the armed forces? By repealing the law, homosexuals are no longer required to keep their information private. The law has never required coming out of the closet, just kept that information confidential. If gay people prefer to be open about their homosexuality that’s okay, but if they prefer to keep that information private then that’s more than okay too. I think abolishing the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell law is a step forward to eliminating discriminatory rules. Gay people still worry about persecution regardless of the law. They have no doubt already experienced judgment or discrimination in one way or another.
In response to “Behind the Numbers - Public's Take on Cutting Defense."
ReplyDeleteI don’t believe that the nation should make such drastic cuts to the defense system because I think our country needs good defense from other countries. I can see the rationale for cutting spending on defense if the reason is for the sake of taking away unneeded expenditures. However, I do not believe that cutting defense spending should be used as a means for balancing the federal budget. Although obviously this implementation would reduce the federal budget deficit I believe that there are significantly more efficient monetary and fiscal policies that can and should be used to induce the same desired result.
"Georgia Facing a Hard Choice on Free Tuition"
ReplyDeleteBy Kim Severson
Published: January 6, 2011
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/07/us/07hope.html?pagewanted=1&ref=us
ATHENS, Ga. — Students here at the University of Georgia have a name for some of the fancy cars parked in the lots around campus. They call them Hopemobiles. But there may soon be fewer of them. The cars are gifts from parents who find themselves with extra cash because their children decided to take advantage of a cherished state perk — the Hope scholarship. The largest merit-based college scholarship program in the United States it offers any Georgia high school student with a B-average four years of free college tuition. But the Hope scholarship program is about to be cut by a new governor and Legislature facing staggering financial troubles. The lingering effects of the recession and the end of federal stimulus funds have sunk many states into a fiscal quagmire. The seriousness of the problem, and a growing concern over how much worse it might become, have many states struggling to find ways to trim services or raise revenues. In Georgia, that means taking a slice out of the Hope scholarship. When it was begun in 1993, the program was covered easily by Georgia’s state lottery. Politicians enjoyed how happy it made middle-class constituents. Educators praised the way it improved SAT scores and lifted Georgia from the backwaters of higher education. It was considered so innovative that 15 states copied it. And while the lottery-based scholarship programs in states like Tennessee are dipping into reserves to cover the costs, none have fiscal woes as big as Georgia’s. Part of it is the program’s popularity. A majority of freshmen in Georgia have grades good enough to qualify for Hope, which covers tuition, some books and fees — but not housing costs — at any Georgia university or technical school. And even though as many as two-thirds of Hope students let their college grades slip so much that they no longer qualify — “I’ve lost Hope,” they joke when it happens — Georgia still gives away more financial aid per student than any other state. Since the program started, 1.3 million Georgia students have received a total of $5.6 billion in educational support. The program offers as much as $6,000 a year for some students. But the program has become so popular it cannot sustain itself. Lottery sales, which by law can pay for only the Hope scholarship and a free prekindergarten program, will be short $243 million this fiscal year and as much as $317 million the next, according to state budget estimates. Last year, lawmakers had to pull millions of dollars from the state’s reserve fund just to cover the cost. But this year, there is nowhere to turn. Like the other states that are facing the worst fiscal crisis in recent memory, Georgia heads into its legislative session next week staring at a budget deficit of as much as $2 billion. And that is after billions of dollars in cuts over the past two years that have reduced the state’s spending power to $17.9 billion for fiscal year 2011. But trim the program that for years has paid to educate the children of the most reliable voters in the state? “Undoubtedly, this is, in every sense of the word, a very strongly ingrained entitlement for a certain segment of voters, and politicians are indeed reluctant to touch it,” said Christopher Cornwell, a professor of economics at the University of Georgia, who has studied the effect of the Hope scholarship on the state, including an analysis of the positive impact the scholarship has had on car sales.
Politicians are hoping for mercy as they begin this month to make decisions that will surely have the parents of college-bound students scrambling to find new ways to pay for tuition. “We trust and we hope the people in the state of Georgia understand the position we’re in,” said State Representative Len Walker, a Republican who leads the House Higher Education Committee. They do and they don’t. I support Georgia’s decision to cut funding. Everyone has to make sacrifices in this economy and if Georgia wants to limit funding for the Hope scholarship then so be it. Like the article said, Georgia offers more financial assistance than any other state, and I feel it is ok for them to cut back. Personally, I got a little ticked off learning about the Hopemobiles (for this I feel the article is biased). That is absolutely ridiculous from my point of view, and I would definitely not be complaining about funding for this program if I was out driving a brand new car with the money I saved from not having to pay my college tuition. However, I know this is certainly not the case for every family, so what happens to those students who are completely dependent on their Hope scholarship? For those who do rely on the Hope scholarship, what other alternatives could they use for financial assistance? Also take into consideration how successful this program has been and the many opportunities the Hope scholarship has given Georgia’s students.
ReplyDeleteIn Response to "House Clears Way For Healthcare Repeal Vote"
ReplyDeleteDespite the fact that in the short term the repeal health care bill would put the United States into a larger deficit than exists already, I believe in the long run it doesn’t matter. I believe we need to repeal the health care as a matter of principle based on the ideals this country was founded on. In the long run I believe it will be better to preserve the freedoms that we hold dear in this country intact and untainted. I believe that the health care bill is blatantly unconstitutional when it allows the government to unfairly regulate the economy. Congress is allowed to “regulate commerce” but not force a consumer to buy insurance from a private company merely because they exist. We enjoy a free market economy in America where we have liberty, not a command economy.
In response to "Georgia Facing a Hard Choice on Free Tuition"
ReplyDeleteFirst of all I find myself laughing and confused at the fact that there is a “merit based” scholarship that offers free tuition to seniors who have a “B” average. If the state of Georgia is going to have a merit scholarship there should be significant merit involved. However at the same time, I believe that there should be few merit scholarships, and that those should be available only to the few achievers who actually deserve it. Instead I think that scholarships should be “need based.” This would alleviate the problem of families who are completely dependent on the Hope Scholarship. The Hope scholarship is an utter waste of resources and should be cut, or better yet morphed into a need-based fund given to those who qualify.
In response to Sara's "Twin Rivers schools given funding freedom"
ReplyDeleteI beleive the SSFR program has good intentions and I do agree with Sara in that it would be a good idea to try throughout different school districts. I think it is important to give the schools more financial freedom rather than having the distirct decide everything. With schools in more control of their money, they will be able to supply teachers and programs at the school with their desired wants and needs, giving kids a better and more efficient education. Rather than the district deciding on what the schools need, the actual school can supply themselves with what they actually need.
On the other hand, the district should still have power over the schools within. If the schools gain too much power and don't comply with district regulations, things can get out of hand. It is similar to the idea of federalsim with shared power between the national and state governments. There needs to be a balance and I feel if SSFR is used correctly it will be a highly successful program that will be administered throughout other school distircts.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"Somalia's al-Shabab bans mixed-sex handshakes "
ReplyDeleteJanuary 7 2011
BBC News
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12138627
Men and women have been banned from shaking hands in a district of Somalia controlled by the Islamist group al-Shabab. Under the ban imposed in the southern town of Jowhar, men and women who are not related are also barred from walking together or chatting in public. It is the first time such social restrictions have been introduced. The al-Shabab administration said those who disobeyed the new rules would be punished according to Sharia law. The BBC's Mohamed Moalimuu in Mogadishu says the penalty would probably be a public flogging. The militant group has already banned music in areas that it controls, which include most of central and southern Somalia. Somalia has not had a stable government since 1991. The UN-backed government only controls parts of Mogadishu and a few other areas.
Well this is just incredibly sad. What is worse is that punishment will result in a public beating. But maybe this is considered the norm of the Islamic group influencing and controlling that part of the country. So I don't really know what else to say about this other then it has to do with society and what is considered socially acceptable. My question is why was this law initially enacted? What is Somalia’s situation considering an unstable government? Oh and I wouldn’t want to live there…
In response to Stephanie's AT&T post:
ReplyDeleteI think that if the storms are truly in an emergency state, there are going to be limitations on power supply, and there is no getting around it. However, our society is becoming more and more dependent on technology, and as one of the leading service providers in the nation, AT&T needs to step up to the plate and realize that a lot of people rely on them. There are certainly two sides of this deal. The storm was emergency level, and very strong, Most power was cut off, and AT&T just happened to be included, On the other hand, they are a very popular and advanced corporation, that should possess the monetary and technological means to cover society when society needs it the most.
Rebecca Mion
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteObama signs law hindering efforts to empty Guantanamo
ReplyDeleteJanuary 7th 2011
When Obama was elected into the presidency there was talk about emptying Guantanamo Bay. Now, Congress has enacted a law to stop the emptying of Guantanamo. The new law prohibits Obama from using military funds to provide the inmates of Guantanamo a fair trial. A negative effect of this new law according to Obama is "The prosecution of terrorists in federal court is a powerful tool in our efforts to protect the nation and must be among the options available to us." The benefit of this law is that it keeps suspected terrorists that the government doesn’t have enough evidence to convict them of a felony to stay in Guantanamo.
In this article, both sides of the story are mentioned and it contains facts and quotes.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12141383
Morghan Islip
In response to Brandt's Behind the Numbers
ReplyDeleteI believe that our countries defense strategy should be re-evaluated, however I believe spending should be cut elsewhere not necessarily just in the defense sector of the government. It really would depend on what the money was going toward and how the money will be used. If the $78 billion is not being used to decrease the deficit, then what would be the point of even cutting the spending. And if the $78 billion is coming from useless programs in a 3d world country that doesnt have the funds to attack the United States, then I see no reason as to keep funding efforts in those countries.
Morghan Islip
Sudan: One Country or Two
ReplyDeleteJanuary 4th 2011
Southern Sudanese vote on Sunday to separate or keep the large African country of Sudan together. If the Southern Sudanese vote to separate Sudan, they get the shorter stick because northern Sudan is much more developed. The southern country would be smaller, less developed, and less populated. With the vast number of ethnic groups in Sudan, a division between the groups is tricky. If the southern Sudanese vote to separate Sudan, they will have many small, different ethnic groups. In Northern Sudan, the primary ethnic group would be Muslims. In short, the southern Sudanese would get the short end of the deal concerning education, water, food, and infant mortality but they would be stopping the conflict between the ethnic groups.
This article is from the BBC. There is no bias in this article because it is simply schematic images that represent the differences of Sudan in different aspects.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12115013
So is peace worth the sacrifice of giving up the rich part of the country?
Should Sudan be split into two different countries?
-Morghan Islip
In response to Morghan's "Sudan: One Country or Two":
ReplyDeleteThis is a really hard situation in which to decide whether to break up the country for peace, but lose their wealth or have war and more help. It also is something hard to decide upon since we do not live there and do not have to deal with these type of situations on a daily basis. But I would think that they would want peace more. Then they do not have to be in fear of losing their lives every time they step outside. I mean these peaople in Sudan kind of already know how to deal with living in dis-advantaged areas, so it won't be so different for them. For them, I think peace is worth sacrificing the rich part of the country.
"2010 Worst Year For Bank Failures Ince 1992"
ReplyDelete157 banks failed last year in 2010 which is an even larger amount from 2009. In 2006 which was just a few years ago there were no bank failures, showing how quickly our economy has taken a turn for the worse. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp (FDIC) believes that 2010 will be the high water mark for bank failures, because the FDIC predicts that it will have more than enough money to meet the anticipated cost of failures through 2014.
Failed banks tend to continue to operate seamlessly as the are taken over by other banks in transactions arranged by regulators. Bank failures are generally lagging indicators of economic trouble. The economy can be on the mend by the time struggling banks succumb.
I belive there is no real biased in this article as it is simply stating facts.
-Should the government bail out failing banks or let them fail?
-Do you really belive 2010 will be the high water mar for bank failures or will it only get worse?
Hilzenrath, David S. "2010 Worst Year for Bank Failures since 1992." Washington Post - Politics, National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - Washingtonpost.com. 28 Dec. 2010. Web. 08 Jan. 2011. .
“Cars May Sense Drunks at Wheel”
ReplyDeleteThere is new technology that is proposed to reduce the amount of drunk driving. Researchers say that they are about 5 to 7 years away from developing this into cars. Basically this would be a sensor or touch sensitive device that would sense the blood alcohol levels and if they are too high, prevent the vehicle from starting. This could assume that all drivers are potential drunks and may prohibit some car buyers from the vehicles that would have the device. Drunk Driving is the leading cause of deaths on America’s roads. It has killed more than 250,000 people and more than 10 percent of Americans have admitted to driving drunk in the past year. Many have concerns about this technology and are convinced that the device would be set below the legal .08 percent. They feel that a glass of wine at dinner or a beer at a football game shouldn’t put them at risk to not be able to start their car. This technology would create a situation where all drivers are guilty until proven innocent.
I don’t feel that there was any bias in this article because it stated the facts and was able to cover both sides of the dispute.
I think that drunk driving does need to stop and a device like this would be a great improvement. However, it should not limit people who want to drink one drink with dinner. If it did in fact set its standards at the legal limit than I feel like it would be a wonderful improvement that would save thousands of lives a year.
Do you feel like this technology would be too intrusive?
Would it be unfair to people who do not drink and are now submitted to alcohol testing every time they start their vehicle?
The Sacramento Bee
By Ashley Halsey III
Originally from Washington Post
January 8, 2011
"Illinois House passes death penalty ban, Senate next"
ReplyDeleteJanuary 6, 2011
The Chicago Tribune
The Senate in Illinois passed this ban with a 60-54 majority vote. They've found that 12 innocent people have been put to death and therefore do not believe they should be taking such extreme and permanent actions. Ten years ago the governor placed a moratorium on the death penalty. The first time the ban was voted on, it lost by one vote. This second time, some chose not to vote and others changed their vote. Those against the ban say that it's very useful to threaten people with the death penalty to get them to talk and that some crimes deserve such harsh punishment. Those supporting the ban think that killing people isn't an acceptable form of punishment and if they are found innocent, it could be too late and they cannot be brought back to life.
I believe this is a step in the right direction. Twelve innocent people have been put to death in this state alone and that is simple not acceptable. It will be interesting to see if this ban can get all the way through and be passed. The current governor still says he is currently in favor of keeping the death penalty.
I don't think there's any bias in the article since they give arguments for both sides and present the facts of what has happened with the House votes.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-illinois-house-death-penalty-v20110106,0,6165035.story
"Officials Say Congress's Gabrielle Giffords Shot"
ReplyDeleteUS Representative Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head during her appearance in Tucson, Arizona. an unknown number of others were wounded when an assailant opened fire in an area where the lawmaker was meeting with constituents, officials said. A hospital spokesperson said Giffords was in critical condition. One victim died right after the attack and many of Gifford's aids have been wounded.
The gunman in the attack has been identified as Jared Laughner. House Speaker John Boehner said. "An attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serve." The FBI and local law enforcemnet are investigating the attack along with the suspect Jared Laughner.
Gifford's was elected into congress as a Democrat in 2006 and wa just reelected in 2010 as she beat out a popluar Tea Party candidiate. Giffords has supported the healthcare bill which many believe that may be the reason she was shot. After the House vote approved the healthcare bill in March, Giffords office in Arizona had been badly vandalized.
-How should the government better protect its Representatves?
Tang, Terry. "Congressional Officials Say Gabrielle Giffords Shot - TIME." Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com. 08 Jan. 2011. Web. 08 Jan. 2011. .
"CES 2011: GM, Powermat team up to make the Volt cord-free; plus more car tech"
ReplyDeleteGeneral Motors and Powermat recently announced that they would team up and integrate cordless charging into the new Chevy Volt. They say there will be no more need for cigarette chargers as all you would need to do is put your electronic device on a small mat in the console of your car. I feel like this is a great piece of technology and should be integrated into every car. "Quallcomm recently signed a letter of intent to work with Powermat to further develop its wireless charging technology, and GM hopes to put the chargers in future Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac products from next year." I bet this product will soon spread to other car companies.
Along with this, OnStar has announced its release of rearview mirror response that can go in almost any car because as of now it has only been availiable in GM cars. Technology in cars has been improving greatly over the last few years.
-Do you think having this 'powermat' in cars will be beneficial or will it just become a hassel and people will result back to cigarette charges?
Tsukayama, Hayley. "Faster Forward - CES 2011: GM, Powermat Team up to Make the Volt Cord-free; plus More Car Tech." Blog Directory (washingtonpost.com). 07 Jan. 2011. Web. 08 Jan. 2011. .
Oh and my last article was not biased as it was just stating news in forms of facts and not opinions.
ReplyDelete"Family: Stepmother says illness killed Zahra Baker"
ReplyDeleteJanuary 6, 2011
The Charlotte Observer
The ten year old girl's stepmother claims that Zahra died from an illness that lasted about two weeks. Zahra's parents didn't take her to the hospital because they were afraid that authorities would find them since the dad was in the country illegally. They say that they found her dead and did not kill her. After she died, they went crazy and dismembered her body. Parts of her body where hidden in separate locations. There had been previous allegations that the stepmother was abusive. Her phone records have shown that she was at the locations where the body parts where hidden.
There wasn't any bias since the article only told the facts of the case so far. They didn't outright accuse the stepmother of committing the crime, just saying she's the prime suspect right now.
I think the stepmother and father committed the crime of dismembering her, but I'm not sure if they actually killed her themselves. They definitely had a hand in her death by not taking her to the hospital if she really was sick. This would mean her death was caused by their neglect in the first place. They may also be insane because who would dismember their child and hide it. It's unreasonable to think that you can just hide a child and have no one realize they're missing.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/01/06/1958840/family-stepmother-says-illness.html
In response to Ashley's Drunk Driving article:
ReplyDeleteAs your article said, driving under the influence is the main cause behind car accidents in the United States. I believe that if there is technology, though obviously a few years off, it should be used to prevent the death and serious injury that often comes as a result of alcohol and drug related car accidents. This new device could potentially severely decrease the amounts of drunk driving in the United States.
There also wouldn't need to be a big debate on privacy since the only person who knows the car can't start is you. It may be embarrassing for some but that's much better than becoming involved in an accident. And honestly, people shouldn't be driving with any alcohol in their system because alcohol affects all people differently. Even if they are under the legal limit, it doesn't mean their senses and judgement aren't impaired.
Though obviously there are going to be flaws in almost any system they put in place, the more important thing is the overall result which seems to be keeping drunk drivers off the street and encouraging designated drivers be present.
“Colleges accelerate recruitment from China”
ReplyDeleteMany colleges across the United States are recruiting more students from China. Over 40,000 undergraduates from China have been recruited to attend university here. The colleges claim that this creates the essential diversity. “Chinese students bring added value to the campus, admissions officers say, because their academic preparation, global prospective and willingness to pay full tuition at cash-strapped campuses.” The China economy is booming and there are more millionaires and a larger middle class. The students are motivated and have the academic preparation. They feel that the higher education in the U.S. is very prestigious and also think it’s a very free country. American students do not like the communication struggles and say that the Chinese students cluster together and mess up the grading curve on math tests. “There are other challenges as well, including increased demand for engineering classes and complaints about dining hall rice.”
This article was not biased because it stated the facts and told the point of view of different people including a Chinese student as well as an admission director.
I think that diversity at college campuses is very important. However there already is a lot of diversity in America. Yes, culture is important as well and students from different nations are a good thing. China should not have the majority of student recruitments internationally. Admissions should attempt to create a balance. If it creates tension on campus than it’s not beneficial.
Should schools overly recruit from China when there are just as well qualified students here?
Is the benefit of diversity worth the cost of tension on campus?
The Sacramento Bee
By Lisa M. Krieger
Originally from San Jose Mercury News
January 8, 2011
"Leave Twain Alone"
ReplyDeleteMark Twain's famous novel Huckleberry Fin has once agai taken front stage for his use of language. Specifically the "N Word." In the past years thisissue has become more and more apparent that the N word is not somthing that is used publically. That it has always been demeaning, but just recently (within 10 years) people do not want to see it written anymore.
Twain used this word because it was the word of the times.
What many people are theorizing is that the public does not like the raw truth of the word. They want to move on, and for it to be a word of the past. If replaced, the word "slave" would be input instead.
However, would that not be considered somthing like, "softening the the truth?" It is indeed a word of the past, and it shall stay a word of the past, but why should it be taken out of a classic book, when it completely depicted the times back then?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/07/AR2011010704451.html?hpid=opinionsbox1, Kathleen Parker
Sunday, January 9, 2011
In response to Liana's Death Penalty article:
ReplyDeleteAs much as it is a tragedy that so many people were wrongly convicted and put to death,I don't think Illinois should get rid of the death penalty. Besides being a good motivator, the Death Penalty is there to punish people whose crimes were so terrible that prison wasn't a suitable punishment. And even if they are given a death sentence, prisoners have ample time for appeals. Nobody should be wrongly sentenced to death, but nobody should get leniency in their sentencing because the system didn't work for some people.
"Aircraft Carrier Captain Is Removed Over His Role in Coarse Videos"
ReplyDeleteJanuary 4, 2011
The New York Times
Captain Owen Honors was removed from his position after the U.S. Navy after they found out about coarse and sexually explicit anti-gay videos he had participated in. They cite "profound lack of good judgement" as their reason for his expulsion. He says he made the videos a few years ago as entertainment for the crew and it was shown to approximately 6,000 people. The Navy is still investigating details of the videos and who knew about it.
There was no bias since the article told what the videos were and what the Navy did in response.
I know that these videos are extremely inappropriate but then I also wonder if this punishment is violating his freedom of speech. I agree with the Navy that is does show a profound lack of good judgement which is grounds to remove him.
Was removing Capt. Honors justifiable and necessary?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/05/us/05military.html/?_r=1&src=mv
“Tucson schools told to end Mexican American studies”
ReplyDeleteA Latino literature class in Arizona caused legislature to be created with restrictions to Mexican American programs. This class and others in the Tuscan Unified School District’s Mexican American programs have been declared in violation of the state’s law that went in affect January 1st. This went into effect due to inappropriate teaching methods including the notion that Mexican-Americans are treated unfairly. The state’s superintendent insisted that they were taught that the government was bad. The new law states that programs that promote overthrowing the government, promotion of resentment toward a race, and programs that advocate ethnic solidarity instead of individuality are all banned. Teachers in the district have filed suit in federal court challenging the constitutionality of the state restrictions.
There was no bias in this article because it simply stated the facts and did have good representation from both sides of the controversy.
I think that culture studies are very important in school and should not be cut. What is more shocking is that the article mentioned that the other culture programs including black, Asian, and American Indian studies were left untouched. This is a problem, especially since many of the students are Mexican-American due to Tuscan being so close to the border.
Is it fair to cut classes for Mexican-American individuality in Tuscan?
Is it a violation of the constitutional rights of the students?
The Sacramento Bee
By Marc Lacey
Originally from The New York Times
January 8, 2011
"Rift in Arizona as Latino Class is Found Illegal"
ReplyDeleteAs Arizona as been cracking down on their illegal immigration issues, they also are looking at classes in schools that may be teaching against the government. There is a class at a school called Latino Literature, but supposedly they are teaching more than just literature and topics such as the American government come up. The class has been declared illegal eventhough similar classes for African American, Asian and American Indians have been left untouched. The class is said to discuss literature that talks about how Latinos are mistreated by Americans and how they want to topple the US government. The state superindendent of public education says that they are the ones resegregating. If the classes are found to break the new law enacted the school can lose the funding it gets from the governemnt. The class can be claimed to be illegal if only one race is allowed to attend, if they advocate overthrowing the US government or suggest being added back to Mexico. If the program allows ethnic solidarity and the other 3 provisions then the program has to be dissolved and the Latino lit class is said to. Many of the teachers at the school have filed that the new law is unconstitutional. This school is also said to have the lowest test scores in the state and so they ned to focus their efforts more on the fundamentals rather than on the ethnic classes.
I think that the article is definatly biased becuase in all of the things that the state super indendent of public education says, the author of the article always agrees. He did not get the real infromation about what is actually taught in the class but more about what the government says they teach. I think that they may need to require higher test scores first and then they can have their other extra classes. But I also think they can not just look at the Latino classes but if they are going to call them illegal they have to examine all the classes. Or the government should come up with a course outline for the the class and they have to follow it.
-What should the students do to help fight for their class?
-Do think that the classes should be left alone or should the government intervene?
Lacey, Marc. "Rift in Arizona as Latino Class is Found Illegal". New York Times, 7 January 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/us/08ethnic.html?pagewanted=1&ref=us
In response to Ashley's "Colleges Accelerate Recruitment from China"
ReplyDeleteAs bad as this may be, I don't have a particular side on this issue. On one point of view, I am frustrated when I hear about the recruitment of foreigners to colleges. First off, even if the Chinese are paying their tuition, Americans still generally have to end up paying for the recruits in some way or another, be it taxes or higher tuition to create more space at the college. Also, since the foreigners (Chinese or others) are taking up the space in the colleges, the room available for the Americans is scarce, thus making it much more competitive to get into schools. Besides academics, many of the foreigners are also taking many athletic scholarships, as seen in schools such as Berkeley and USC, so Americans don't really have much of a chance of being on the sport teams. The schools need the best athletes possible and take the best people, even if none of them are Americans. Lastly, and this next part is very biased, but I have heard from people who have visited China, that the students there have a very different learning program that the United States and actually don't really learn anything in their classes, just study really hard for the tests. So if the colleges are looking for the best test-takers, then they are searching in the right place; otherwise, they aren't necessarily the smartest. After saying all that however, I look back and realize how selfish this all is! I mean, America is supposed to be the home of the American Dream that anyone can achieve. Just because we were lucky enough to be born in the United States doesn't mean that other people shouldn't be allowed to try to achieve success from elsewhere. America is based off of the fact that we should all be given a chance to have success, so we should let the foreigners have a chance in college, which will lead them to this path of success. Just because we are American doesn't mean we can be all high and mighty. It is unfair to the foreigners if we don't let them come to our colleges because if they are good enough to compete against the best, then they should be allowed to. However, I don't think the colleges should go and recruit Chinese solely for the purpose of making their college more diverse. America is diverse, so they can easily find people in America who could easily come into the college without tension.
In response to Liana's "Family: Stepmother says illness killed Zahra Baker" artice.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the parentsmost likely killed their daughter, especially if the mother had a suspeced past of abusing her daughter. Not only doeshis make me believe that they killed her, but the fact tat they took the time to dismember her, says that it could have been pre meditated. I understand the fact that they would not want to be deported, but free clinics do exist. This case seems so "shady," that if I were on the jury, I would most likely find them guilty of killing their daughter. (However Ialso do not have all of the information, so i know my opinion could very well change.)
In response to Cassandra's illegal immigrants article
ReplyDeleteArizona created laws that promote racial profiling. Yes, illegal immigration has been a persistent problem in this state. However, there are other ways to deal with it. The federal government should keep the power in this situation. Arizona is violating the constitution. Immigrants should be encouraged to be in a better place with more work opportunities. The majority of the illegal immigrants are innocent in this entire situation and should not have to be forcefully sent back.
In response to Brandt's "CES 2011: GM, Powermat team up to make the Volt cord-free; plus more car tech" article.
ReplyDeleteBeing able to replace cigarette lighters with a mat, to charge phones sounds like a very usefull and convinient piece of technology. While it is not a hassle to have car chargers via cigarette lighters, these mats sound very convienient. I know that personally, somtimes I take my car charger out of my car, and when I am not home to realize it and need it, it is very annoying. However, although these mats sound convienient, will they take up a lot of space? Will they be textured so nothing slides off? not only that but will the have to sign on with all cell phone companies to get some kind of universal adapter to sync with all of the phones? It sounds nice, but it also sounds like somthing that may take a while to actually get up and running, and once running, then to get all of the "bugs" worke out.
In response to Liana's death penalty article:
ReplyDeleteThe fact that 12 innocent people died due to the death penalty is not fair. There are probably many more cases that remain unknown as well. Even life in prison would be a better solution than killing people. Even if there is a small chance that they are not guilty than they should not receive the death penalty. It is such a brutal consequence and to me is very immoral.
In response to Skyelar's "Leave Twain Alone":
ReplyDeleteIt seems like changing the language would cause the story to have less authenticity. The "n word" was something they said back then and we shouldn't ignore this just because we don't like to hear it. It would be ok if people wanted to get an edited book as long as they know that that's not the way Twain wrote it originally. I agree that you shouldn't use that word in this day in age, but back then it wasn't such an offense, and we are being educated of a different time through Twain's novel.
In response to Skyelar's Mark Twain novel:
ReplyDeleteEven though the N word is obviously an extremely derogatory term, in Mark Twain's novels, especially Huck Finn, it's not always used with that connotation. the word is used to explain how much slavery and racism were a part of the culture of those times. Many of Twain's characters use it merely out of habit, not malice. In Huck Finn, I know it's used to describe how many kids were raised without the slightest chance of learning tolerance or that race doesn't matter. If the book offends people than they can choose not to read it. If they take the N word out of Twain's books, which is probably the most used word, there's no purpose in reading the books at all. As much as I deplore racial slurs, Twain uses them to show how rampant and horrible racism was in his time. that lesson shouldn't be taken out of his books.
Pakistan politician 'shot dead by his own bodyguard
ReplyDeleteJanuary 4th 2011
The outspoken politician, who was advocating for the release of a Christian woman from death row, because of the countries strict violation of their Muslim religion.His killer was one of his bodyguards. Salman Taseer was the outspoken politician of the Punjab providence and now the delicate country has been thrown off balance again. Because the Islamic extremists of the area were rioting in the street about the Christian woman's release, it is uncertain what the conclusion will be for her predicament.
This video clip was from the BBC World News. There is limited bias in this clip because it is a representation of facts. However, the idealizing of Salman Taseer, could be considered bias.
Should the United States get involved with Pakistan and strengthen the country? Or should the U.S. stay out of Pakistan, even though the climax of a huge riot may be on its way?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12116126
Morghan Islip
In response to Noelle's post about the body scanners:
ReplyDeleteAirport security is very important, especially after 9/11. I think we just need to trust that the TSA are doing there job accurately and realize that we are helping federal security. Yes, it is a privacy issue, but if it prevents an attack than I think it is definitely worth it. If someone is worried that somehow the image will be saved on the computer there is the option of getting a pat down. This is definitely a better option than racial profiling. The terrorists would be a step ahead of this idea and know to pass it on to someone of a different race. They would outsmart the system. Therefore it is essential that technology like body scanners are in airports. I mean yeah it might be embarrassing and a privacy issue but it could potentially prevent a national attack from occurring.
In response to Ashley's “Cars May Sense Drunks at Wheel”:
ReplyDeleteDrunk driving is obviously a big problem in the U.S. These cars would be able to stop many drunk driving situations and save lives. However, I think they should be set at the .08 limit, and not any lower. If someone is below .08, they are not impaired so that they are dangerous behind the wheel. If the government doesn't see a problem with people driving with alcohol in their system that's below this level, car manufacturers shouldn't take it upon themselves to attempt at lowering the acceptable level. Those who know they drive drunk and are ok with their decision will easily get around this, however, but simply buying older cars that don't have this technology or some brands of cars won't include this feature in their cars. Will the government make a law requiring all cars to have this technology? There really is no good argument of why someone should be driving their car when they are too drunk. A lowered number of DUIs would also cut down law enforcement costs, another benefit.
In response to Skyelar's "Leave Twain Alone" post.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Mark Twain's Huck Finn should not be taken out of schools. From reading it last year, it demonstrated the correct time period, with the dialogue and setting and the racism present. Although you could also find the same information in a text book, Huck Finn provided a reference to the information. Without a reference, it is much more difficult to remember.
On the topic of the "N word", it was a part of history and a common word back in the 1870's. Why a book should be banned for carrying language from the time period is incomprehensible.
Morghan Islip
"Chinese military worries U.S."
ReplyDeleteThe Sacramento Bee
By Ken Dilanian
Page A8
January 8, 2010
Recently, the United States has found some online sites that show China is advancing technologically in military resources. While this may not seem like a big deal, some are worried that China's defense mechanisms will compete with America's. America, who leads in defense capability, is surprised by how quickly China is advancing. One reason this is such a surprise is because China has yet to develop their own fighter jet engine, but still buys them from Russia. Why, then is America so concerned? Well first, Americans are only comfortable when they are the best at everything. However, a deputy chief of naval operations did confirm that China was able to build its own stealth fighter. While the Pentagon is concerned with China's expanding military powers, the former State Department official thinks that China is still far from matching the U.S. in military capabilities. While it is true that China is catching up technologically, they are still very far behind and not yet a threat to America. One concern of the Pentagon is that since America is in such debt to China, if China gains military power, it will be able to dominate American allies such as Japan and South Korea. Others disagree, however, saying that China would not want to disturb it's second-largest trading partner and highest debt holder. Some food for thought: America is the highest spender in defense budget at $534 billion, while China only spends $79 billion.
This article is biased because it is most worried about America, since this is an American paper. We do not know all that China has advanced, since we are not involved in their military findings. Also, it is biased because it is trying to calm people at the end of the article, telling them that America is still superior (which is an opinion and it would say no matter what).
I believe that America shouldn't be spending that much money on military technology, especially because of our deficit. I understand that we need to protect our country, but really, we do not need to be the number one spender on military resources, no other nation even coming close to us in how much we spend. Also, why does America panic every time another nation gets even close in any aspect. Do we have to be superior in everything and be such a wasteful country? No wonder we are in debt.
Questions to think about:
1) Should America be concerned with China's advances?
2) Is it okay for America to be the leading spender in military resources during a recession?
3)Do you think China will want to end U.S. naval superiority to dominate other nations?
In response to Lianas Deth penalty Post.
ReplyDeleteI don't particularly agree with the death penalty. "An eye for an eye" is not somthing I have rally ever believed in. However, some crimes are so gruesom and horrible, what else is there but to give someone the death penalty? I think that everyone deserves a chance at life. They deserve a chance to live, and follow the law. However, when they ruin their chances by doing somthing such as killing people, they dont even deserve to be able to just sit in jail for the rest of their lives. Then again, some cases are hard to prove whether sombody actually commited the crime or not. It is these cases where nobody really knows what to do with, and their emotions seem to take over with what the case is about, to put someone to death. Until we can figure out what to do with those particular cases, I tihnk death penalty should be suspended.
Congresswoman Giffords Shot in Tucson
ReplyDeleteJanuary 8th 2011
Today, Congresswoman Giffords was participating in Congress on your corner, where a group of politicians meet in a public place for the public to add input, such as a supermarket.While carrying on this meeting, a man ran up and started shooting. A buller (1 out of the 20 shot) landed in Giffords head. She is currently in critical condition at a hospital, but will survive. In addition to this incident, vandalism has increased toward Giffords, as her windows have been broken. Many other Congressmen have reported the same thing. As I was reading this article from the NY Times, I couldn't believe it. Since when has our country stood for violence taking the place of government. That is not what this country was founded on.
This article from the NY Times, could have bias when portraying the image of Giffords.
When have we had to shoot an elected representative to get what we want?
Morghan Islip
In response to Caitlin's article about American Muslims
ReplyDeleteI believe that the Muslim stereotype that they are violent and terrorists is sad. However, because the terrorists were Muslim that attacked us on 9/11, they have become all have become a threat, similar to the Japanese during WWII. Although I don't believe putting the Muslims in internment camps, I do believe that the Muslims in America deserve an equal opportunity of the rest of the immigrants. In fact not giving the Muslims an equal chance is racist, an idea which is definitely prohibited.
In Response to Liana's “Cars May Sense Drunks at Wheel” post.
ReplyDeleteAlthough this seems like it could be a good thing, like Liana stated, I do not think adults should be limited to one drink at a dinner party, or a sports game. This "Limiting" is not neccessary for many, however I realize that drunk driving is a leading cause in deaths in the United States. However, I think that somthing more effective would just be to have more checkpoints on the road, more often. Technology always has flaws, and it is very common for it to malfunction every once in a while. If this happens, if sy, somone who has not have an ounce of alchohal gets in their car and it says they have (because of a malfunction,) will there be techs on call, all of the time? And if one has a malfunction, usualy more will, so will the techs handle it from their computers, or will they have to come out and inspect it? The point of the technolog is there, however there are still many pieces that should be worked out, including how high the alchohal level would be in somone's blood, where the car will not allow them to drive.
"South Sudan: ready for its independence vote"
ReplyDeleteBy Tristan McConnell - GlobalPost
Published: January 7, 2011 14:49 ET in Africa
A violent attack broke out in Sudan just days before a referendum meant to end the war between North and South Sudan by splitting the country into two. The outbreak, killing six, highlighted the fear felt by Southern Sudanese of retaliation from the North.
Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese president wanted for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court expressed his unlikely support for the separation of North and South Sudan. During a rare visit to Juba, what will be the capital of Southern Sudan, he said he would accept the split to keep peace between the people of Sudan.
People of South Sudan now have less to fear from the North with the blessing of their former enemy and President. What Secretary of Defense Hilary Clinton called a "ticking time bomb", is now viewed optimistically by global authorities.
The referendum vote begins this Sunday and is scheduled to last for a week. It was an internationally-brokered peace deal settled in 2005 that ended one of Africa’s longest and bloodiest conflicts fought over resources, religion and ethnicity.
Bashir’s recent conciliatory comments towards his former enemies in the South mark an abrupt turnaround. The reason for Bashir’s visit to Juba this week was to discuss with southern leader Salva Kiir some of the many issues that have not been resolved during the six years between the peace deal and Sunday’s referendum.
Clearly the author sees the referendum as an important move toward global peace, but there isn't bias in his reporting as he discusses the events, not the thoughts behind them.
Africa has always been volatile. I see the separation of North and south Sudan as a step in the right direction. If the split will prevent more war and death in the country, then the country should not remain unified. And the fact that the leader of the Northern Sudan agrees to this separation in the name of peace can only improve the chances for all Sudanese. Hopefully this resolution will be an example of peaceful compromise worldwide.
Is it better for the Sudan to split?
Is it really the intention of Omar al-Bashir to create peace?
Which result is in the best interest of the U.S. and the rest of the world?
In Response to Emily's "Millions facing hunger in Niger by Moni Basu" post.
ReplyDeleteUpon a little research, I found that Niger is indeed suffering a large drought. I agree with Emily that countries are prioritizing their money and aid to other countries that sound or seem a lot worse off. Somthing people could do is put a percentage of proceeds out to iger, just like is done for places such as Haiti. I agree that everyone deserves food and water, but there are just too many places in the world to be completely 100 % helped. We as a country can only do so much, without hurting ourseves. Helping others is deffinitely a big deal to our country, as it should be, but it just is not possible to help everyone, all at once, because if we did, we ourselves would end up impoverished as well.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"Pr. George's officer loans cruiser to criminal imitating police"
ReplyDelete"A Prince George's County police officer willingly lent his cruiser to a man who used it to impersonate an officer and take money from Hispanics during patdowns, authorities said Friday."
The officer who lent his police cruiser stated that the man he had lent it to, he was aquaintences with. As of yet, officials have arrested the man they think was the impersonator, put the officer who had lent the vehicle on paid administrated leave. Nobody has been charged with any crime yet, because officials say, they are not sure how to charge the man.Officials have discovered that the man who had "borrowed" the police cruiser, had also been involved in robberies days before, and that they were not sure if the other officer had known about them or not.
"It's completely outrageous and an extreme egregious act," Mints said. "I have no idea why he would allow this person to access his cruiser."
Although the department is speakig with other officials, they still have not said why, it is, that the officer lent out his cruiser, other than he had known the impersonatng "officer" and thought he could trust him.
I feel this is slightly biased because it mainly focuses on te fact that the officer lent his police cruiser out, and out unintelligent is was of him, rather than being aout the man who it had been lent to. i.e: why, who was he, why did he need it.
Do you think that the officer know about the robberies?
Is it a good reason, that he knew the impersonator, to lend his police cruiser to him?
Why had he not recieved any other punishment besides a paid administrative leave?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/07/AR2011010706341.html?hpid=newswell, Matt Zapotosky
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 7, 2011; 11:27 PM
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"Fluoride rules get new look"
ReplyDeleteThe Sacramento Bee
By Mike Stobbe
Page A8
January 8, 2011
Remember when your parents gave you those little fluoride pills when you were little? Well apparently they weren't really necessary. Federal officials recently decided that many Americans have too much fluoride in their diet. While this may sound strange, since it's not like we eat fluoride straight for every meal, fluoride is present in many products. Some of these products include water, toothpaste, mouthwash, and even soda! The effects of this excess fluoride include white splotches on teeth and even serious effects such as the risk of brittle bones. These effects are mainly present in children ages 12-15. While the addition of fluoride in water was praised (decreasing teens' teeth decay from 90 to 60 percent), the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is thinking about lowering the recommended levels of consumption. While most of the effects are just cosmetic problems, 2 out of 5 children are affected, although usually only the dentist can tell.
I think this change is necessary, but only in certain products. This is because if we remove it from everything, then the problem of tooth decay will reoccur. I personally don't like the idea of drinking fluoride in my water, so I wouldn't mind if it was removed.
The bias in the article is that there are only facts about how fluoride can affect someone in a negative sense, not why it's good in a diet. This article also talks about the effects, but they aren't life-threatening.
Food for thought:
Do you think we should remove fluoride from our diet? Is the government overreacting about the effects of fluoride? Do you think that if we remove the fluoride, children's teeth will start to rot again, considering the amount of sugar consumed in the American diet?
In response to Skyelar's "Pr. George's officer loans cruiser to criminal imitating police"
ReplyDeleteThe fact that a police officer thought it was okay to lend out a government car is unnerving. Obviously, this police officer doesn't have very good judgement and gives in to peer pressure quite easily. For being in a position where one can punish and even kill people, this officer doesn't seem qualified to be in his position. I'm not sure how the police car system works, but it doesn't seem like the officer was in a position to be able to loan out the car, regardless of who it is. I believe that even if the officer didn't know exactly what it was that the criminal was up to, he probably knew that it wasn't good, or else he would have used his own car. Even impersonating a police officer isn't an okay thing to do. Another reason the police officer must have been in on it was because there is no explanation for why he would risk his job to let someone impersonate him. Many things could go wrong in that situation. Either the officer knew what was going on, or he just couldn't think straight! While I could understand if the officer lent the cruiser out maybe once to a friend in need, this was a repeating occurrence, which meant that he must have had to know what was going on. If he was helping a friend in need, no questions asked, it would have been a one-time thing; however, he seemed to have a deal going with the criminal. Lastly, the fact that the man is a criminal should give someone a big flashing sign that they are up to no good! He robbed a bank, so he obviously isn't doing anything productive with the car. Tthe punishment given to the officer is a little strange, considering that he is getting paid without working. This sounds like a vacation and a bonus all wrapped into one. This case needs to be reviewed again!
In response to Skyelar's Mark Twain article:
ReplyDeleteAfter reading and thoroughly examining "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" is Mr. Newton's class last year, it's clear that the "n word" is an essential part of that novel and of it's historical significance. Schools all over the nation have been fighting for years to ban the word from the book, but their attempts are thwarted for good reasons: without the word in the novel, the story would have much less of an impact. Mark Twain didn't put the word in the novel over 200 times on accident. He had a purpose to it, and the purpose was for society to examine racism and slavery. I believe that if the term is replaced with a "softer" word, one of America's most influential classics will completely lose it's message.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"How Social Networks Spread Eating Disorders"
ReplyDeleteTIME Magazine
By Alice Park
Originally posted January 7, 2011
It's no news that Americans of all ages are drawn to the television set and dream to look like the starlets they see on "Gossip Girl" or "The Vampire Diaries." But do these kinds of programs have the same effect on unindustrialized parts of the world? Harvard Medical School has the answer. A study of pre-teen and teenage girls in Fiji who had never watched or owned television sets has determined that girls who watched television "were 60% more likely to display abnormal eating habits than those without such exposure." The study is the first of its kind, and shows a direct correlation between the media industry and eating disorders. "The girls were asked questions such as whether they were happy with their body, whether they limited their eating in order to influence the shape of their body or their weight, or whether they were afraid of losing control of their eating habits." Similar questions were asked of girls in Western civilizations, and there were similar answers, as well. Because Fiji is already struggling with disease and poverty, the introduction of mass media onto their society would have detrimental effects for teenage girls.
The author demonstrates pretty significant bias towards the Fijian girls, though it's difficult not to. The facts clearly showed that mass media has a socially harmful effect on girls, with 60% more likely to show sings of an eating disorder. The author doesn't mention any possible income, though, that mass media may have on a poor country like Fiji. The entertainment industry is a profitable business and may in fact help Fiji in the long run.
In my opinion, it was a bold step forward for Harvard Medical School to undergo such a study, because it could have significant effects on the entertainment industry as well as the well-being of Fiji. I find it tragic that these young girls were so easily influenced by the media.
Do you think that it would be in Fiji's best financial interest to have mass media?
Is the media to blame for the eating disorders, or should the girls develop more self-control?
Should this be studied in other unindustrialized countries first, before jumping to any conclusions about social networks?
In response to Jackie's "How Social Networks Spread Eating Disorders”.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that this should be studied in other unindustrialized countries before jumping to any conclusions. However, I do think it is pretty obvious that girls without much influence from the media are less susceptible to eating disorders. Today, television and magazines are plastered with beautiful women among perfect bodies and flawless features. I think that the image that the media depicts directly reflects on what girls think they should look like. Nonetheless, I don’t think that the media should receive all the blame for eating problems and disorders. Girls should be held responsible for their decisions and how they treat their bodies.
In response to Jackie's "How Social Networks Spread Eating Disorders"
ReplyDeleteThis article really highlights a huge issue that is prevalent in American society: the pressure to look a certain way. Everyone, no matter gender, ethnicity, or even age, feels this pressure in one way or another. Many fall to plastic surgery as a way to feel better about themselves, while others put their lives in danger just to look a certain way. It is always astounding to see results of surveys that show how many people are unhappy with their bodies and/or image. In this study, all is to clear of the effects of forcing people to feel that they must look a certain way. While this study may be biased because it surveys girls in a vastly different culture than America, Fiji, it still shows the effects of mass media. I think the fact that girls from other nations, who may have more of a struggle getting food and need all the nutrients they can get, makes the survey even more astounding; nevertheless, using girls in the United States who didn't watch television might have been more relevant to American lives. I do not believe that Fiji should invest money into mass media because the results will backfire. Unless the commercials also show food that will fix all the problems in the world, the images of what the celebrities look like will not effect the girls in a positive way. By showing these shows, Fiji could lose money in other ways. This mass media would definitely change the culture of the nation. (This is a stretch), but in some cases, it might even happen that Fiji loses money in its food production because women and girls will not want to eat. I feel that the media is to blame for what is happening to these girls with disorders. While girls should take control of their lives, some are not directed by parents or guardians in a reasonable sense and can use mass media as a guide of how the world works. The mass media knows exactly what it is doing and is purposely trying to brain-wash its viewers (For Twilight Zone fanatics, this is a replica of one of the episodes!). I think that while more research is always welcomed, the results of the mass media's influence is obvious; therefore, no more studies need to be done to prove to me what mass media can do to someone's idea of the world.
"Northern Sudan fears secession"
ReplyDeleteThe Sacramento Bee
By Alan Boswell
Page A6
January 8, 2011
In relation to the previous book we read, "What is the What", I thought this article was a perfect fit! As this newspaper starts, it talks about the horrible conditions of Khartoum, Sudan, which as we all know are not desirable-in fact they are horrible. Khartoum holds the main power of Sudan's economy and politics. It is where the country surrounds itself in news around the country. It is here that an election will decide whether or not southern Sudan will break away and form a new country. A worry about southern Sudan breaking free is that since it is so behind compared to the rest of the world, no one knows if it can survive in the world on its own. While many fear for the south, the separation also means that the north will have to deal with being its own country led by a weak government. Another downfall for the north is that most of the oil, which is a main income for the country, is in the south. The main reason southern Sudan was to secede is because they want to get away from the poor economic situation that is mostly being brought down because of the north; however, this problem won't be resolved just by separating the country into two. Boswell (author) seemed very sure that it was in Sudan's best interest to stay as one country, for only the negative effects of separation were written, not the positive ones. I agree with him, however, that the problems of Sudan will not just disappear once the countries secede. Do you think it is best for the country to split in two? What might be the biggest concern of Sudan if it did split? Would the countries survive as two separate nations, or even be more prosperous?
"Exotic Animals Non Grata in Ohio"
ReplyDeleteKaty Steinmetz
January 7, 2011
Time.com
swampland.blogs.time.com/2011/01/07/exotic-animals-non-grata-in-ohio/
Some politicians issue pardons as they leave office, while others make last-minute appointments. Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland is instead leaving his constituents with a message: Dangerous wild animals pose a threat to Ohio's citizens. In an executive order issued yesterday, Strickland restricted the possession, sale and transfer of big cats, bears, wolves, large constricting and venomous snakes, crocodilians and non-human primates (though the last specification is not, presumably, meant to condone the trafficking of actual humans). The order goes into effect immediately but will expire in 90 days -- meaning it will be up to incoming Republican Gov. John Kasich to make his own statement about the private ownership of exotic pets. The event at the heart of this order took place in August, when a 24-year-old Ohioan named Brent Kandra was mauled to death by a bear at a home in Columbia Township, about 30 minutes outside
Cleveland. He worked with another man who keeps exotic animals and was attacked when opening the bear's cage for a feeding. At the family's request, the black bear was eventually put down. Still, people of the town remained uneasy; the death of that bear left seven others, wolves, tigers and a lion in the Buckeye menagerie of Sam Mazzola. Mazzola says that the order, which bans the new ownership (as well as selling and trading) of wild animals, has little bearing on a situation in which the victim was an animal caretaker. But the fight over exotic pets, taken up on one side by animal rights activists (and concerned citizens) and on the other by passionate owners, is a much larger story. Those against exotic animal ownership, like the Humane Society, say that owning these animals is bad for them, that most private owners can't meet the animals' needs in captivity and are putting themselves and their neighbors at risk. Those supporting ownership often say that all animals were once wild and that they're being unfairly persecuted for a hobby or pet that they love -- since highly publicized maulings like Kandra's prove that such deaths are the exception to the rule. The problem for people championing wild animal ownership is that however compelling their statistics, their arguments are hardly as powerful as Kandra's devastated parents endorsing Strickland's order. More than half the states have some kind of ban in place, while most others have certain licensing restrictions. And it only takes one poignant accident to get more legislative balls rolling. What do you think, Swamplanders? Is owning exotic pets an unnecessary risk or are the owners of such animals victims of irrational fear?
ReplyDeleteThe author of this article shows bias when she gave an example of why keeping exotic animals as pets might be too risky, including the case where a man was killed by a bear. She also gives support from the Humane Society, who agrees that ownership of these animals should not be allowed. I agree with Strickland’s opinion against keeping wild animals as pets. From my point of view it’s completely illogical keeping a wild animal in captivity. No matter what they do, people will never be able to provide the care these animals receive in their natural habitats. How will someone adequately satisfy their nutritional and social needs? Are exotic pets a danger to human health and safety? Consider the risks to the environment and animal welfare. What are the benefits of keeping these animals as pets?
test
ReplyDeleteA 45-year-old Christian woman was sentenced to death last year for allegedly insulting an Islam prophet. Under current law, blasphemy is a legal offense and punishable by law. Religious extremists support the laws and, if not punished by law, punish others themselves. In Karachi, Pakistan, about 50,000 people met for a rally in support of keeping blasphemy laws as they are. The rally brought together many moderate and conservative Muslims. On Tuesday, one supporter named Mumtaz Qadri shot Punjab governor Salman Taseer, who advocated changing the laws. Muslim groups support Qadri and warn against speaking out in favor of changing the laws. Such actions and the sheer size of the rally itself persuade legislators not to amend the laws for now, but some legislators still contend that the laws will be changed so that minorities are protected.
ReplyDeleteIn America, we would generally be appalled by such behavior and disgusted with the laws. Our First Amendment guarantees us the rights of freedom of speech and religion. However, our freedom to peaceably assemble is also protected. Although this does not include the murder of Taseer, it does mean that the rally participants have a right to voice their opinions.
This article is clearly biased in favor of changing the laws because it does little to explain or defend the Muslims. Most of the quotations and evidence in the article are one-sided in favor of supporting changes.
Why would government set in place such laws? How would such a large group support a law (not this particular one) affect you if you were a legislator? Is it difficult to separate from personal beliefs? Is it right that legislators allow crowds to sway them? Explain why or why not. To what extent should the public persuade government?
Khan, Ashraf. "Thousands Rally in Pakistan for Blasphemy Laws." Msnbc.com. 9 Jan. 2011. Web. 9 Jan. 2011. .
In response to Bryn’s “Northern Sudan Fears Secession”.
ReplyDeleteThere are arguments that the separation of northern and southern Sudan would be the right choice because Sudan is not a unified country. However, if Sudan splits both the north and south will have extremely weak and unstable governments. I agree with Bryn’s opinion that it is best if the country does not secede. Sudan’s problems are not just going to disappear if the country separates. To add to these control and governmental issues, the north would become even more unstable if the south split off. Because there are more oil resources in the south, and this is Sudan’s main export and source of income, the north would suffer greatly. Economically, the north will not be able to survive. I think that this would only create more conflict between the two parts of the country.
Snakes Add New Plague for Flood-Stricken Australians
ReplyDeleteBy Marina Kamenev
Friday, Jan. 07, 2011
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2041213,00.html#ixzz1AZC3ss8x
The recent flooding in Australia is causing more than humans to lose their homes. The abundant wildlife of Australia is too finding their homes underwater and are making way to dry land. The only problem is so are the people. Safety officer Kevin Lucas said that he killed around 40 snakes at the airport, and these aren’t just any snakes. Brown snakes and taipans are the most common being washed up, both lethal. Not only are there snakes to worry about, but crocodiles as well. On Thursday the mayor of Rockhampton Regional Council told residents who chose to stay in their homes that they would be cut off from emergency supplies because he did not want his staff in the snake and croc infested waters. There have been no incidences of snake or croc related death yet, but that isn’t keeping residents from being wary. Kamenev (author) states that even when the water dries up residents will still have much to worry about, seeing as though it may become a breeding ground for mosquitos and other insects. Obviously the author is on the side of the people rather than the animals and I agree. The animals pose too much of a risk to the residents stuck in the flood. Do you think it’s right to kill the animals, even if there have been no incidences? Is it right to deny people emergency supplies just so staff won’t have to take a risk in the water?
"Southern Sudanese Begin Historic Vote on Secession."
ReplyDeleteThis article regarded the same event as Bryn's earlier article, but with a different spin. It focused on the climate of Southern Sudan in the midst of the referendum vote on whether or not Sudan should declare independence. The journalist spoke of the general jubilance of the large amount of voters that lined up in the middle of the night to cast their excited votes. This opportunity to finally declare themselves independent brought excitement to much of the population of Sudan, it seems. Though it was acknowledged that secession would mean extreme poverty for the southern Sudanese, the release from political and religious persecution seems a welcome exchange for the celebrating populace. That, then, is the focus of this article. The peeple themselves are jubilant over the opportunities for their future and what this might mean for their country.
There isn't much, if any, direct bias in this article. The only bias could be the focus on the positives of the crowd's reactions and how the writerdirected his article at the depiction of the day's festivities.
I think that this event is monumental in the history of Sudan. The fact that the Southern Sudaness has been provided with tthe opportunity to declare their say on the matter is very significant. No matter which way the vote goes, this moment in itself is something for all involved to remember. Based on this article, it seems as if secession is the majority preference, but the vote will not be official and counted until the end of this week. I do fear for the political instability and potential corruption that will follow secession, especially as the north and south negotiate over terms and borders, but I think it is a necessary step in the progression of the nation and the possibility of peace to be attained.
Based on what we've read in "What Is The What?", do you think that Southern Sudan should secede?
What role should foreign nations play, if any, in the development of the new nation if it does secede?
Are religious differences alone enough reason for a region to desire independence?
This article by Jeffrey Gettlemen was published through the New York Times on 1/9/11. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/world/africa/10sudan.html?ref=sudan
In response to Skyler’s “Leave Twain Alone”.
ReplyDeleteI think that the use of the n-word in Huckleberry Finn reflects the raw representation of how African Americans were viewed in the early 1900’s. Although the n word is racial and derogatory, I do not think that the word should be removed from the books. To change the word in the book would change the effect of the novel completely. Without it, the novel would not be able to fully convey the impact of a racial stereotype.
In response to Bryn's "Northern Sudan Fears Secession" post:
ReplyDeleteI think that regardless of economic convenience, the northern and southern parts of Sudan should separate politically. There is no true cultural or traditional alliance that bands the nation as a whole together and because of this there will always be strife. By splitting the largest nation in Africa, it will create the opportunity to have a rule that is more appropriate for its constituants. Certain areas and people of the nation will no longer be exploited by those hundreds of miles and leagues of culture apart. Independence will bring much to the persecuted region of Southern Sudan that could not be possible otherwise. It's true that for the beginning there will be polical instability, but a period of development will be necessary anyways to get the nation back on its feet as a world player. The truth is, however, that it doesn't matter what I think should happen. The vote has been called, the citizens have shown up, and for now all the world can do is wait and see what has been decided. In this case, at this point, it is up to democracy and the Sudanese people to decide their political fate.
“Spain's strict new anti-smoking rules take effect”
ReplyDeleteJanuary 1, 2011
BBC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12104056
A tough anti-smoking law has taken effect in Spain. The ban - one of the strictest in Europe - outlaws smoking in all bars and restaurants. Smokers will also be prohibited on television broadcasts, near hospitals or in school playgrounds. The law tightens anti-smoking restrictions introduced in 2006. Spain has a strong cafe culture and the owners of bars and cafes have complained the law will hurt business. The anti-smoking rules introduced in 2006 outlawed smoking in the workplace, but it let bar and restaurant owners choose whether or not to allow it. Most chose not to impose any ban. Only large restaurants and bars were obliged to provide a smoke-free area. Hotel, restaurant and bar owners have said they could face a 10% drop in trade with the new rules. The industry has already seen a sharp fall in sales due to Spain's economic problems. But doctors argue the new legislation will help smokers give up. Some 160 Spaniards a day die from smoking-related illnesses, four of them from passive smoking.
I don’t think this article is biased, the author gives a pro (new legislation will help addicts give up smoking) and con (a possible addition to Spain’s economic problem) about the smoking law. The author talks about one of Spain’s newest smoking restrictions: no smoking in bars or restaurants. Should Spain be allowed to impose such strict smoking rules? Do these restrictions have a more positive or negative effect?
Germans Fear Dioxin Has Contaminated Small Farms
ReplyDeleteBy, Judy Dempsey
January 8, 2011
page A4 of the New York edition
4,700 small farms were halted from sales in Germany do to dioxin discovered in used for chickens and pigs. The contamination started when a manufacturer shipped tainted fat for use in animal feed pellets. Officials say that the shipping of tainted fat may have started in March, months before it was admitted. The manufacturer says the contamination occurred when they mixed waste from biofuel production in assuming it was safe. The contamination was discovered only through a random food testing. Some of the eggs tested had up to 5 times the legal limit. South Korea, Slovakia and the Unites states have halted some poultry and pork exports from Germany, causing the many small farms to lose out on big money. The German Farmers’ Association has called for the feed producer to compensate farmers for their losses, which is about 52 million a week. I feel like this author was slightly biased as they only stated the wrong doings and downfalls of the European Unions health regulations, but thats what the article was about. How do you think a situation like this could be prevented? And do you think it it right that the feed manufacturer compensate the farmers?
"Iran says it can create its own nuclear fuel plates, rods"
ReplyDeleteBy the CNN Wire Staff
January 8, 2011 7:52 a.m. EST
Iran can now make its own nuclear fuel plates and rods.
They have set up an advanced facility in Isfahan to manufacture fuel plates. There was a massive development in the field of nuclear fuel rods and plates. With the completion of this facility in Isfahan, Iran is now among the few countries that manufacture both the nuclear fuel rod and plate.
An Irani Official told state media in December that Iran was able to produce everything it needs for the nuclear fuel cycle, making its nuclear program self-sufficient. But it was not clear that Tehran actually had the technology to turn enriched uranium into fuel rods to run a nuclear reactor.
The United States and its allies have feared that Iran is trying to produce a nuclear bomb, but Iran has denied it, saying the country will use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes only.
Iran has produced close to 88 pounds) of 20% enriched uranium and hopes to inject the first batch of the domestically produced uranium into a Tehran research reactor the end of 2011.
Iran has generally invited organizations and international groups. The details will be given out later by the foreign ministry.
There isn't any bias in the article since there are no opinions, just facts.
I think the fact that Iran now has nuclear capability is of concern. The Middle East is very unstable at the moment in part because of the United States, and the United States is not on good terms with many Middle Eastern countries. Though Iran maybe be using nuclear power innocently at the moment, the ability they now have gives them many more option for military weaponry.
Is Iran's new advance a threat?
Is there anything we can do to prevent clashing with Iran?
Should the United States be concerned with this new development?
In response to Bryn’s “Fluoride rules get a new look”.
ReplyDeleteI think that the government is overreacting a little bit because the effects of fluoride are not life threatening and dangerous. Nonetheless, these side effects are important and people should be aware of them. I think fluoride should be removed from certain products, but certainly not the ones that we consume in order to prevent tooth decay. In that case, I don’t think we should completely remove fluoride from our diet. To answer the question about children’s teeth starting to rot if we do remove the fluoride… consider the amount of sugar applied in the American diet. I think the answer is simple. Eat right and take proper care of your teeth.
In response to Kaitlyn's article on exotic pets:
ReplyDeleteWhile I'm certainly no PETA member, I completely agree with the author of this article. Wild animals are called "wild" for a reason; they were not meant to play a role in human households, and provide no benefit that I can think of. What's the upside to owning a venomous snake or a bloodthirsty lion? There are easier ways to prevent people from going on to your property...The only positive that I could see from allowing the ownership of exotic pets is if there would be a sufficient need for the opening of an "exotic animal food supplies" store, and in turn jobs could be created. But admittedly, that's a pretty far stretch. Point blank, wild/exotic animals should not be allowed to be owned like a common household cat.
The state of Oklahoma will file a lawsuit within the next few weeks challenging the constitutionality of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.
ReplyDeleteThe case was backed by Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallon, who called the health care overhaul an unfunded mandate that is bad for the economy and unconstitutional.
Pruitt and Fallon, both Republicans, focused on a provision in the new law requiring most Americans to have health insurance by 2014. Oklahoma voters backed an amendment to their state constitution last November specifying that residents cannot be required to purchase insurance.
The law's so-called "individual mandate" was found unconstitutional by a Virginia federal judge in December.
The 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, is expected to rule on that lawsuit in the next few months. The case, regardless of the outcome in Richmond, is almost certain to ultimately be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The challenges in Virginia and Oklahoma are separate from a lawsuit filed by Florida and 19 other states. A federal judge in Pensacola, Florida, heard arguments in that case in December.
Congressional Republicans in Washington are expected to push for a repeal of the health care overhaul next week, though the measure is not expected to clear the Democratic-controlled Senate.
There is no bias in the article. It only talks about what will and might happen with the case.
I think it's premature to be filing a law suit against a measure which hasn't even taken place yet. We don't know how effective or ineffective the health care bill will be. The constitutionality of the bill is obviously left up to the Supreme Court to decide, but they let the law pass once already. The states filing suit are the ones who tend to be Republican. The country should wait and see what happens once the bill is in place before trying to get rid of it.
Is the health care bill unconstitutional?
Should Oklahoma be able to amend its state constitution to avoid obeying a federal law?
Should the new health care plan be instituted at all?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"Oklahoma to challenge health care law"
ReplyDeleteBy the CNN Wire Staff
January 7, 2011 1:34 p.m. EST
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOk this one is really long so I have to split it up.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOkay I'm going to try one more time because it keeps deleting my posts????
ReplyDeleteFacing Scrutiny, Banks Slow Pace of Foreclosures
ReplyDeleteBy DAVID STREITFELD
Published: January 8, 2011
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/business/09foreclosure.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=todayspaper
PHOENIX — An array of federal and state investigations into the way banks foreclose on delinquent homeowners has contributed to a sharp slowdown in foreclosures across the country, especially in hard-hit cities like this one. Over the last several months, some banks have been reluctant to seize homes from distressed borrowers, economists and government officials say, as they face scrutiny from regulators and the prospect of sanctions when investigations wrap up in the coming weeks and months. The Obama administration, in its most recent housing report, said foreclosure activity fell 21 percent in November from October, the biggest monthly decline in five years. Here in Phoenix, foreclosures fell by more than a third in the same period, reflected in the severe drop in foreclosed homes being auctioned on the courthouse plaza.“There’s no product, just nothing to buy,” complained Sean Waak, an agent for investors, during a recent auction. The pace of foreclosures could be curtailed further by courts. In a closely watched case, the highest court in Massachusetts invalidated two foreclosures in that state on Friday. The court ruled that two banks, U.S. Bancorp and Wells Fargo, failed to prove they owned the mortgages when they foreclosed on the homes. If the slowdown continued through this month and into the spring, it could be a boost for the economy. Reducing foreclosures in a meaningful way would act to stabilize the housing market, real estate experts say, letting the administration patch up one of the economy’s most persistently troubled sectors. Fewer foreclosures means that buyers pay more for the ones that do come to market, which strengthens overall home prices and builds consumer confidence in housing. “Anything that buys time, that reduces the supply of houses coming onto the market, is helpful,” said Karl Guntermann, a professor of real estate finance at Arizona State University. It is not that borrowers have stopped defaulting on their mortgages. They are missing payments as frequently as ever, data shows. But the lenders are not beginning formal foreclosure proceedings or, when they are, do not complete them with an auction sale. And in the most favorable outcome for distressed borrowers, some lenders are modifying loans so foreclosure becomes unnecessary. The drop in foreclosures began in late September when some lenders were revealed to have been using so-called robo-signers to process thousands of foreclosures without verifying the accuracy of the data. As the investigations into the problems proceeded, the uncertainty caused many lenders to become more cautious. Their foreclosure procedures, the banks have repeatedly said, are sound. But preliminary
results of several of the investigations have indicated substantial problems. Coordinating many of the inquiries is the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force, established by President Obama.“The administration is committed to taking appropriate action on these issues where wrongdoing has occurred,” said Melanie Roussell, an administration spokeswoman. The diminished supply of foreclosed homes has already had an effect on prices at the auctions on the courthouse plaza here, bidders said. Houses change hands on the plaza with a minimum of ceremony. Three sets of trustees hired by the banks sit a few feet apart, their backs to a statue of a naked family looking for all the world as if its members had just been cast out of their home. The trustees call off properties in a monotone to bidders clustered around them. Winners must immediately hand over a $10,000 deposit in the form of a cashier’s check. On a recent afternoon, one bidder, Pam Mullavey of Infoclosure, found herself in a bidding war with Chris Romuzga of Posted Properties for a 2001 house that had fetched $644,000 at the very peak of the boom. This time around, the bank set the floor at $271,000. Ms. Mullavey and Mr. Romuzga rapidly pushed up the price in varying increments of $100 and $500. Mr. Romuzga’s client had planned to pull out at $307,000 but asked him to keep bidding as Ms. Mullavey sailed on. Her winning bid was $310,100, well above what a similar house might have fetched just a few months ago.“Sometimes I wonder why people are bidding so much,” Ms. Mullavey said. For Mr. Romuzga, it was the fourth time that
ReplyDeleteafternoon he had been outbid. Only once had he secured a property. The investors’ frustration could be a good thing for Phoenix homeowners, who have seen values fall 54.5 percent since 2006. In the last few months, home prices have started to drop again. A decline in foreclosures, economists say, could break the fall. Cameron Findlay, chief economist with the mortgage company LendingTree, said that the shifting behavior of lenders had helped change perceptions about the foreclosed. “Initially, society’s view was to run them out of the house,” he said. That resulted in vacant and dilapidated homes, which blighted neighborhoods and drove potential buyers away.“People should be hopeful the modification programs work — for their own benefit,” said Mr. Findlay. More than four million households are in serious default and vulnerable to losing their homes. Lenders maintain that cases of borrowers improperly foreclosed are extremely rare. But the Federal Reserve, which is investigating lenders’ policies in conjunction with other banking regulators, has found significant weaknesses in risk management, quality control, auditing and compliance. Another investigation is being conducted by the Federal Housing Administration, which is examining whether loan servicers are exhausting all legally required options before foreclosing on government-insured mortgages. An agency spokeswoman said that initial reviews indicated “significant differences” in efforts by servicers to keep borrowers in their homes. A third investigation is being conducted by the Executive Office for U.S. Trustees,
ReplyDeleteIn response to Kaitlyn's exotic animal article:
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with Strickland's opinion that people should not have exotic animals as pets. They are called "exotic" for a reason. They belong in their natural habitats. Honestly people who have these animals as pets are selfish and do not know what is best for the animal. Many times owners do not care for them properly. I know of many organizations such as "Wild Things" that have to take care of these animals that were maltreated by their owners. There is also a large safety risk to the owner. I do not understand why anyone would choose to have an exotic pet. Maybe they want the attention? I don't know. It's dangerous to them, unfair to the animal, and limits the animal.
part of the Justice Department. It is looking into documentation errors by lenders and their law firms in homeowners’ bankruptcy filings. At the state level, there is a joint effort by all 50 state attorneys general, with the specific goal of changing the face of foreclosure in America by making it more difficult for lenders to act against homeowners. The effort, led by Iowa’s attorney general, Tom Miller, is in flux as several prominent attorneys general left office and their replacements decide whether to make foreclosure reform a priority. There have been many attempts during the housing crash to stem the flow of foreclosures, only fitfully successful. Some experts think neither federal reforms nor any agreements brokered by the attorneys general will make much of a difference. “Whether it is really true that there are millions of foreclosures that could be avoided if servicers were just more willing to do more modifications that make sense — meaning overall losses would be less than would otherwise be the case — is far from clear, and in fact highly unlikely,” said Tom Lawler, an economist. Loan servicers are not set up to identify the true financial picture of each borrower having trouble, Mr. Lawler said, and cannot easily figure out who is likely to stop paying without a modification and who will keep sending a check every month. The courthouse plaza bidders in
ReplyDeletePhoenix do not believe their livelihood is threatened. By the end of January, several bidders predicted, lenders would gear up and foreclosures would once again be abundant. In the meantime, Tom Peltier watched unhappily as a house started at $68,000 and quickly spiraled up. He finally locked it in at $98,500. “That was about 20 grand more than I wanted to pay,” said Mr. Peltier, who planned to rent it to his sister as soon as he moved out the former owner.
ReplyDeleteSo I think this article was pretty interesting and I’m glad I could actually understand it because of gov/econ. The author was pretty factual. He gives examples on both sides to if a decrease in foreclosures would improve the economy. It was unusual to me how banks have actually stopped foreclosing homes in order to avoid investigation by the government. Some reasons to investigate would be to find out whether banks are foreclosing on government insured loans or determine if business-like weaknesses caused improper foreclosures. Personally, I feel that by them avoiding investigation, it hints that they might have something to hide. I am curious to how many and what other investigations are currently in progress? What are the repercussions for banks that have compromised the foreclosure process? It’s interesting how the drop in foreclosures is said to boost the economy. But it does make sense. Because of fewer foreclosures, buyers will have to pay more money for the houses on the market. This will strengthen the economy by building up consumer confidence and increasing prices in the housing market. However this article states that borrowers are still not making their house payments. So the sole reason for fewer foreclosures is because the banks have stopped giving them, not that people are successfully paying their house payments. Lenders also state that borrowers that are improperly foreclosed are extremely rare. How is this supposed to help the economy if people are still borrowing money that they will never pay back? Does this decrease in foreclosures really help the economy?
"Ex-Schools Chief Takes New Course"
ReplyDeleteFormer Washington D.C. school chancellor Michelle Rhee started a group called "Students First". The goal is to bring change to public education by raising money and giving it to politicians who support the groups policies and to local school districts who accept the groups policies. The goal is to raise $1 billion. Rhee also says Students First wants to shift power away from the teachers union and towards advocates for the kids. The teachers union believes Rhee unfairly blames educators for the systems poor performance. Rhee wants to link teachers evaluation with students test scores. Also the group wants to give money to schools, for example, who want to increase teachers pay and make it easier to fire bad teachers.
The article was mostly a report of information, so the bias was limited. I suppose the article could have mentioned the argument against Rhee and her group more.
I agree that the public education system needs to be altered, and I am glad someone is stepping up and trying to create change. However, I am not sure that giving money to politicans to get the job done is going to be effective. I would feel skeptical donating to a organization that I wasn't exactly sure where the money is going. I also see the teachers union perspective. Could you imagine if we linked our teachers success with star scores? Although our scores have improved greatly, kids still treat the test like it means nothing. I definitely feel that teachers need to be accountable for their performance, and that they are too protected under the teachers union. Change in education needs to happen, and maybe Rhee's efforts are a solid first step.
Things to consider:
-how can we change the public school system and still allow teachers to unionize?
-how do we measure a teachers performance?
-how do we get schools more money?
By Stephanie Banchero Wall Street Journal
December 7th 2010
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704156304576003372566611618.html
In response to Kaitlyn's anti-smoking in Spain article:
ReplyDeleteIt seems that Spain is a little behind the times. I think it is definitely a good thing that the new law was implemented. As everyone knows, smoking is very harmful and costs many lives every year. Second-hand smoke is also a huge problem. Here in the U.S. we banned smoking in public areas. And yes, at one time smoking was definitely part of the culture here. But as time goes on, people adjust. Most people realize the health danger that smoking causes. With this new smoking ban in Spain, the people will have no choice but to accept it. Therefore, many will stop smoking. People will always go to restaurants and bars. And over time Spain will realize that smoking is not a big part of their culture after all.