Sunday, October 10, 2010

Friday, October 15th.

Great job on last week's post! I really enjoyed reading your thoughtful responses to each other's articles. This week in C&E we will be talking about the Constitution. The three branches of government and their outlined powers according to the law of the land will be discussed. Please read and respond to an article that is about politics or government. With an election on the horizon (November 2nd), there should be PLENTY of interesting material out there.

I look forward to reading about your discoveries! :) 



    The state of New York admitted that they did not send Election Day ballots to overseas voters in time for their votes to be tallied into the final count. The deadline to mail out the ballots was October 1st, twelve days before the state announced its mishap. When the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department heard about this preventable setback of events, it sued the state of New York. Many changes regarding ballot-counting have been allocated to this current issue, designed to extend the time frame for which arriving ballots will be counted. As a preventative measure, election officials must now mail out overseas ballots 45 days before each federal election. Unfortunately, these measures may not save all overseas voters, including many New York soldiers, from an ineligible vote.

    I am dismayed that the state of New York missed such a crucial deadline. On November 2nd, all of the House seats and at least 36 of the 100 Senate seats will be up for election; due to a preventable mistake, some overseas soldiers serving the United States will not be able to have a say in the new body of United States legislative figures. Though I am grateful that the Justice Department officials are working to optimize the outcome, the government should have taken precautions and preventative measures. In class, we discussed that the Constitution's Preamble promised Americans justice and general welfare; the promises of equality and democracy are affiliates of the former promises. In order to form a more perfect union, we must provide each citizen an opportunity to exercise their voting power. I hope that the completed ballots arrive back to the United States in time for the individual opinion to count.

    Jessica Gao
    6th Period

  2. Recently, a federal judge ordered the United States military to put an end to enforcing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy to end the discrimination against gay troops. U.S. District Judge Virginia Philips ordered the military to stop any investigation, separation, or anything else that may have happened under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Since the policy has been put into effect, more than 12,500 people have been removed from the military. There are people who believe the recent repeal of the policy is a good thing, and there are people like Republican Howard P. "Buck" McKeon in California who believe, "This decision could have a negative impact on military and family readiness since the Department of Defense is unprepared to address the issues that are bound to arise from such a hasty change."

    I think it's a ridiculous rule. Anyone in the entire country should be allowed to be who they want to be and they shouldn't have to worry about their sexuality. If someone wants to fight to protect our country, it shouldn't matter if they're gay, lesbian, straight, or bisexual. They should be allowed to be who they are, especially if they're willing to give their life for the United States.


    As the electrons draw near, Connecticut's race for the open Senate seat gets more and more heated. At the moment the Democratic candidate Richard Blumenthal is currently ahead in the polls, at 54% to Republican Linda McMahon's 41%. The issue is that McMahon has had trouble reaching her female voters, which is proven by the fact that Blumenthal has almost a 2-1 advantage among women. McMahon, a former World Wrestling Entertainment executive, isn't the ideal image that most women seem to be looking for in a politician. Along with that, her over-campaigning (excessive TV ads, billboards, etc. ), is pushing people away.

    I personally think that this is an extremely positive thing. Although I'm a hardcore feminist, I think that there is no reason to vote for a candidate solely because she is female. Rather, the voters of Connecticut are considering the issues, which I consider extremely important. These elections could potentially lead to major political shifts, therefore paying attention to the political party, policies, etc. is much more attention than gender. Besides, when people are voting for who they want rather than what image they want, the government is stronger.

    Kendall Simms 6th pd.

    A contending candidate in Oregon’s race for governor is a towering former New York Knicks player. He would also be the first republican governor of the state of Oregon in 24 years. Many find his irregular credentials surprising despite the fact that it has been an all around unusual political season. His experience as a former treasurer of the NBA Players Association is the basis of his views of unions in the work force. Dudley is strongly backed by the Republican party and has received a large amount of funding for his campaign as a result. Republican’s substantial investment in Dudley is a sign of their confidence that he’ll pull through. Dudley’s surrounded himself with people who’ve aided big name politicians such as Arnold Schwarzenegger and John McCain. Dudley and his supports are reliant on the philosophy that money can have an overwhelming effect on the outcome of a race in this particular day and age.
    It amuses me how limited experience someone can have in politics these days and still do well in political race. I actually like the idea that unconventional politicians such as Chris Dudley can I have a chance at becoming governor or any other position. Although I don’t like the fact that our politicians can rely on the fact of having a strongly funded campaign, but it is 2010. ]I think it will broaden the variety of minds we have in our government, which just might help resolve stately issues as well as national issues. My one concern however is that people with limited experience such as Mr. Dudley might bring down the political savvy and know-how of our representatives. Either way, I strongly support a more unconventional political spectrum. Something out of the ordinary may be just what we need.

  5. Logan current event
    Connor Randolph

    Show in a recent poll only 26 percent of Americans had a positive view on the federal government. While Six in Ten did had a negative view on the federal government. The poll was conducted in August right after the big oil spill hit Americans hard near the cost. The findings where published just 2 weeks before the elections in November. Although there is a negative outcome of Americans option on the federal government Americans had many positive things to say when it came to the American computer industry. 6 in 10 Americans viewed America’s computer industry, while only 11% saw a negative outcome of the computer industry.
    I have to agree with the people who do not like the way the federal government is operating. After the BP oil spill it was apparent that the federal government needed to step in and help or punish BP and not much was done to do so. Also lately the government has been making unfair taxes and health care is also going down the gutter. I am impressed to see the positive outcome that the computer industry in American has produced. This show a great opportunity to see more computers and help out economy.


    Michelle Obama has started a state- wide tour promoting the democratic party for the midterm elections. Her first stop was Milwaukee and her hometown of Chicago. This is just the beginning she says. She hopes to be the final push for democratic voters. She is persuading them that her husband, the president, is doing what he can. She is letting voters know that we might have been expecting Barack Obama to fix too much, too quickly. Michelle Obama says that she didn't want to take the tour on at first due to her two young children she would have to leave behind. Democrats are expecting her to talk to voters and persuade them to keep with the democratic party. Michelle Obama did not want to "attack" the republican party. Her focus is on democratic voters. While convincing voters, Obama is also defending her husband's agenda. She is using strong words to presuade voters that the Obama party is doing what they can.

    I don't think Michelle Obama really needs to get involved with her husbands job. I think it is important to her, but she needs to focus on her other job, motherhood. I think she wants to get involved and defend her husband, but let him do that himself. If he was able to become president, he should have the responsibilites of staying president. Michelle Obama was telling voters how she likes to keep her family normal. Leaving her children to talk to strangers is not keeping them normal. I think Michelle should do what she can, but I don't think she should have left Washington.


    Ryan Rainey

    This article is about the election in delaware. Even though not many words were said in this article the words that were said were drastic. It says that delaware could change from republican to democrat for the first time in seven-teen years. The republican Mike Castle lost his parties nomination to Christine O'Donnell. John Carney is fighting hard to replace them was said. The funny thing is Delaware likes him alot. He is doing everything he needs to do to win votes. He is making many promises. It will be difficult for him to change this state to democrat from republican but I believe that this could become a difficult challenge. If this happens the state of deleware will help democrats in future elections.

  8. Maria Miggs

    Midterm elections are coming up and both parties are preparing for them. President Obama is back in campaign mode and is reinstating Organizing for America. This group is devoted to getting people to vote for Obama by phone and going door to door. In 2008 there was a large number of volunteers for this organization, but much less people are involved in the midterm elections. The Democratic party is concerned about a few critical states such as Indiana. In the past years the Republicans have been very active. With everything going on with the “Tea Partiers” the Democratic intensity has died down.

    I believe that Obama and the democratic party need to keep up their steam. It’s difficult for some Americans to see the progress that Obama has made for our country. The economy isn’t going to be fixed over night so we need to be patient and have trust in our government. I don’t agree with the tea party views and many tea party members have been winning local elections. I hope that there will be many voters on this off year election, voting for Obama.


    A Federal judge in Florida decided that the government's attempts to stop the lawsuits claiming health care reform is unconstitutional are to be rejected. Those claiming health care reform is unconstitutional say that forcing citizens to get health care is unconstitutional, along with forcing state governments to expand medicaid.

    I think allowing those opposed to health care to continue with their attempts to stop it would be detrimental to all. It would cause the months and months of time spent to pass this bill would all be for naught, bringing everyone back to square one. Those opposing the bill are just being sore losers really, not content to admit that the majority did in fact rule against them to pass this bill into a law. This kind of politics, moving away from progress, solves nothing. Both parties should consider bipartisan cooperation to tackle the issues that affect all Americans, not try to undo any kind of progress that may not be in the direction you want it to be. That's just petty.


    Linda McMahon is running as the Republican candidate (against Democrat Attorney General Richard Blumenthal) for Connecticut’s senator position. If she wins the upcoming election, she will be Connecticut’s first female senator. However, McMahon is having trouble connecting with the female residents of Connecticut and her supporters are predominately male. This is partially due to her involvement in a controversial skit with W.W.E. (World Wrestling Entertainment), a channel that is perceived as violent and promiscuous among many women. Her overly ambitious advertising has also proved to be irritating. McMahon spent tens of millions of dollars on television ads that appear around ten times an hour and large billboards that are displayed everywhere. Many women feel uneasy about the advertisement’s unforgiving attacks on her opposing candidate, Blumenthal, who currently holds 61 percent of all female voters.

    I commend Linda McMahon for running to be the first female senator in Connecticut; however, I feel that her desperate advertisements are very unnecessary and uncalled for. If McMahon emphasized who she is as a woman as opposed to undermining Blumenthal as a candidate, women would find her more appealing. After all, McMahon is a wife, mother, and grandmother, and generally quite relatable. Her previous involvement with W.W.E should not be overlooked, but it also should not be the primary object of scrutiny when one decides whether or not to vote for her. Overall, I do not think McMahon has campaigned to her advantage and it is understandable that women are bothered by her.

    Maria, 6th


    President Obama faced a lot of difficulty during the 2008 elections, but wait until 2012. David Plouffe claims that the Democratic intensity is at an expected level, but the Republican intensity makes the two incomparable. President Obama secured young African-American voters in New Jersey and Virginia in 2008, but many failed to appear at the polls the consequent year. The end of the midterm campaign period is coming to an end, and President Obama is now trying to grab the attention of the young voters and volunteers he enraptured in 2008. If he wants to pursue another term in 2012, he's going to have to step up his game tremendously.
    After reading this article, I feel like I better understand the difficulty Obama has as a Democratic candidate. The Republicans have a noticeably higher intensity level, which makes it more difficult for a Democratic candidate to win a spot in office. Compared to the Reblican candidate for the 2012 election, whoever it may be, I feel like Obama has a lot more campaigning to do to secure votes and his position in office. Personally, to accomplish this, I think Obama should make a larger impact on our society than he has. His plans are mostly long-term, as in they will take a while to accomplish. He should set some short-term goals that will help him get noticed by the American popoulation and also benefit the country. In doing so, I believe he will ingrain himself in the mind of Americans when the time of the 2012 election comes.


    Andrew Cohen

    This article has statistics from a recent poll regarding roughly 1,000 peoples’ opinion on President Obama and his takes on various issues. As it turns out, more people approve of Obama’s personality than his political policies. Fifty-nine percent of people surveyed said that Obama has the personality a president should have, whereas 42 percent of people surveyed said that they agree with his policies. Both these polls show a dip of six percent since May. The article also mentioned that only one-third of independents, and 55 percent of moderates, agree with Obama’s policies. This article credits the drop in his policies’ popularity to the slowly diminishing enthusiasm for his followers after his win in the 2008 election. Despite their diminishing enthusiasm, only four percent of Democratic voters who voted for Obama in 2008 said that they would vote for a Republican congressional candidate this year. The survey was done by telephone.

    This is important because it shows how the public views the president and his policies. This relates to what to what we are studying in class because the survey was only conducted because we have the freedom of press. The people who voiced out their opinion against the president did it knowing that they have the freedom of speech. Both of these freedoms are in the First Amendment. I think that Barack Obama has a great personality, so I’m in agreement with the majority on that regard. However, I honestly do not know enough information about Obama’s take on issues to say whether or not I generally agree or disagree with them.


    Being one of the smaller states, Delaware is often looked through and pushed around. Many people believe that nothing important happens in Delaware and their politics aren't very important either, However, the Obama presidency disagrees completely with this. They are taking great interest into the senatorial race in Delaware. Even though the democratic candidate is winning by numerous votes already, this election is still being looked at. This is because Obama feels that all elections are important due to the effect they can possibly have in the future. With Obama being a democrat and supporting the democratic views and candidates, he must be quite excited to see a democratic senator is winning the election in Delaware.

    I think that it is very important for our countries leading officials to be informed about what is going on every where in the country. They are paying attention to Delaware, even though it is a very small state. This is important because all states can have an effect on our government in some way. It is important not to overlook these states, and to be informed in their political affairs just as well as the larger ones. Also, this is important because it shows that Obama and his leading officials are trying to secure their spot for the next presidential election. By having democratic senators, the same views as Obama are shared, which gives him a higher chance of being re-elected.

    Cole Shoup
    Period 7


    As we all know, a presidential election will happen in 2012. In past interviews, president Obama and his other political partners said that they’re not thinking about it just yet, but in a recent interview, Vice President Joe Biden stated that he and Obama have talked about running for re-election, and that they will most likely run together in 2012. Lots of Obama’s aides have said that Obama spends little time talking about reelection and just tries his best to concentrate on goals like improving the economy. There was some speculation about an Obama-Clinton “dream ticket” recently but now all of that is turned down, because if Obama does re-run (which he most likely will) it will be with Biden.

    I think that this is a good decision by President Obama. I think that if he were to dump Joe Biden for Clinton, or anyone else for that matter, then most people would actually look at him with a frown because that would be an act of betrayal. I do think that Obama will run for reelection, but it’s still a little too early to start talking about that because 2012 is pretty far away, and that we should just concentrate on what the current issues.


    Delaware's Republican Christine O'Donnell is going against Democrat Chris Coon for the Senate seat. However, her campaign has been controversial due to a comment she made back in the nineties. She stated that she used to "dabble into witchcraft." In response to this, she made it so that her first TV ad clarifies that she is not a witch. This ad has grabbed the attention of SNL, and they have made a spoof of the ad. She has run for the Senate many times, but she has been unsuccessful. It seems so that this year is also the case. She is already losing by Chris Coon by 19 points, and polls say among likely voters, 57 percent say they will vote for Coons and 38 percent will vote for O'Donnell. Many people also believe that she is less qualified for the seat than her opponent, Chris Coon. However, some democrats warn that she shouldn't be underestimated. They believe she should be taken seriously, and according to an interview, State Attorney General Beau Biden stated that, "Chris [Coon] is taking her seriously. My party is taking her seriously."

    This event is important because if O'Donnell does get elected, she will have that Senate seat for six years. I don't think I can trust a person who has to clarify that she is not a witch, and have less than half the people polled believe that she is not qualified to be in the Senate seat. My opinion is very biased due to the political views of my family, but I agree with the people polled. She does seem to be less qualified for the seat. She lacks in experience, and it shows from the many times she has lost running for the Senate seat. This relates to what we are doing in class because we have been learning about how people are represented in Congress, and this was part of the Connecticut Compromise. The Senate allows two representatives from each state, and Coon and O'Donnell are fighting for one of Delaware's two seats.

    Jenny Jin
    7th period


    Senate races are taking place all across the country, but possibly the most watched race is the senatorial race in Delaware between former lawyer and now current county executive, Chris Coons, and Tea Party backed Christine O’Donnell. On Wednesday night, the two candidates had their first public debate. Recently, a video was released by Bill Marr featuring Christine O’Donnell talking about how she “dabbled in witchcraft in her past.” She has been rejecting interviews since the release of the video, so this was her first televised appearance in a while. Several weeks ago, Chris Coons was considered a long shot to win the election, but after the upset victory of Christine O’Donnell, many experts believe O’Donnell is too conservative and because of that, the more moderate Chris Coons will come away with the victory.

    This race has easily had the most headlines, from the upset victory of O’Donnell for the Republican Candidacy, up to the exposure of O’Donnell’s past dabbling in witchcraft. I feel that Chris Coons will almost certainly be elected senator. Christine O’Donnell is just too outrageous. It was reported that it took her twenty-three years to get her undergraduate degree, and she has limited political experience. I can’t see Delaware, which is traditionally more of a liberal state, voting for a Sarah Palin/Tea Party backed candidate.

    Brady Strine
    6th period

  17. This comment has been removed by the author.


    Last month, Californian Judge Virginia Phillips ruled that the controversial "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy regarding sexual orientation in the military was unconstitutional. This policy prohibited gays and lesbians from openly serving in the military; in federal court Judge Phillips ruled against the law. However, the Obama administration recently filed documents urging for Phillips to make an "emergency stay" on her decision. Obama said on Thursday that he would end the much-debated Don't Ask Don't Tell policy before his term was up; however, at the same time, members of his administration defended their request to put a hold on Phillips' ruling, saying "the military should not be required to suddenly and immediately restructure a major personnel policy that has been in place for years", according to undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness Clifford Stanley.
    I think that the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy is discriminatory and inhibits the liberty of free speech granted by the First Amendment to the Constitution. It was a great step forward to repeal it, and it is unconstitutional for our government to interfere with the judicial process regarding this issue. Secondly, it is hypocritical for the Obama administration to do this; Mr. Obama has vowed to abolish this law, and the excuses for the stay seem bland and inconsequential. I hope that the government will revise their actions and turn their intent away from pulling down this supremely fair ruling.

    Shane Sater
    7th pd.

  19. The midterm elections are almost here and President Obama is focusing on young voters. This was a successful strategy for him in the 2008. On Tuesday October, 12 Obama met with college students and broadcasted the meeting on the internet through Facebook, Skype, and Twitter. The President is re-engaging his successful online campaign in hopes of helping with the problems with democratic election currently taking place. Back in 2004 when Bush was elected, he had a large volunteer base too. However, this did not help him or his party in the 2006 elections. New Jersey and Virginia both had a large number of youth and African-American voters that sided with Mr. Obama in 2008 who failed to vote last year. Democrats are losing across the country like in Indiana, a key state, that's democratic candidate has been abandoned by the national party. All of this is a warning to Obama that he will need an incredibly strong force of volunteers if he hopes to win the election in 2012.

    I think that campaigning for himself and other democrats is a great idea. I have seen through watching the news that republicans have been strong in elections this season. I think that Obama is thinking ahead for the future like he should be doing. I remember when Bush was in office and democrats were burning up. I think it is because when a president is of a certain party and things are bad, we blame the whole party and go to a new one. I think that the President should continue to campaign.

    Jessica Batson
    7th period

  20. Leila Doerfer
    6th period

    Earlier this week, a judge from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, ordered the military to stop enforcing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. This policy states then homosexuals, that serve in the military, cannot be open about their sexuality. Today the U.S. Department of Justice filed an appeal against the decision. As NPR's Rachel Martin reported, the ruling has forced the Obama administration to defend a policy it wants to repeal. According to a Department of Justice spokesperson, the government is defending the statute because that's what it has usually done when acts of Congress are challenged. But at the same time, the filing goes out of it's way the say that Obama intends to reverse the "don't ask, don't tell" policy through an "orderly repeal process." Some officials from the white house say that this means getting Congress to do away with the policy through legislation. This filing event raises questions about the demand, which forced the Department of Defense to put a stop to all investigations and undecided discharges under "don't ask, don't tell." It's likely the case will now go to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
    I don't think that the Obama administration should be forced to do something that it doesn't want to do. Even though, traditionally, the government has defended like this when acts of Congress are challenged, i think that if people think something is wrong, they should stand up for what they think is right. Especially if they are in a position where they can change things and make a difference.


    Eric Plevy P6 Current Event for 10/15/10

    Recently, there has been a very large debate on the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” law. Basically what this law is stating is that homosexuals who openly admit to their sexuality can not join the military, but they can if they do not openly admit it. The Obama administration seems to be attempting to repeal this law, but many people are debating this topic thus making it difficult. Now of course the title of the article claims he is trying to stick with this law, based on the reading, it seems like he is trying to repeal this law, but debates and disagreements are making it very difficult. People are interpreting Obama’s choice to “suspend” Judge Phillip’s plan to repeal this law early this week into trying to stick with the law. All this states is that the Obama administration wants to hold off on the decision of the law until later. Dan Woods, a lawyer of the Log Cabin Republicans, claims that Obama is not implementing his ideas, and that this would be an example that is unfair to homosexuals. However, there has been nothing that clearly states that Obama is not going to follow through with this plan. Meanwhile, other people claim that this repeal could disturb and cause trouble to the military. Obama claims that this decision will be made before he leaves office.
    So, I have many different outlooks about this situation. First off, I would like to mention that it seems like, once again, the Republican party is trying to use the Democrats, or more specifically the Obama administration as a scapegoat. It appears as if the Republican Party criticizes the Democrats for most of their ideas, just like the mosque incident. Second of all, I believe that this law is completely ridiculous and prejudice. There is nothing wrong with being homosexual; it is just like any other sexual orientation. Just because someone is homosexual should not, by any means, mean they should not be able to participate in activities that straight people participate in. To me, the military might as well apply the law to straight males and females as well; after all, all it is a sexual orientation. This is discrimination, and I support the repeal of this ridiculous law by 100 percent. No one should ever be subject to laws like this that are based upon sexuality, race, gender, nor age. This is important because America is all about having freedom, and not granting rights to someone based on their sexuality does not present this freedom. This is one more thing that could improve our nation if this law is repealed. Everyone should be entitled to the same rights and freedoms. Otherwise it would be unconstitutional due to “all men are created equal”. I thought this would be appropriate since we finished doing the scavenger hunt activity which including laws about amending and repealing laws. Also, we are studying how much power we and the central government should be given. And since our government has agreed that all citizens should have the same rights, freedoms, and powers between one another, this ties right into that. Overall, if this law is not repealed, we are breaking one of our country’s guidelines.

  22. Ryan Hegedus
    6th period

    Legal Pot in California a Big Mistake…or Is It?

    According to the article, California is attempting to pass Proposition 19, making marijuana legal in the state in small amounts for people 21 and older. Proposition 19 will or will not be passed in a November 2nd vote. The author is against the legalization, providing counter-arguments for every argument staged by the pro-legalization group. One argument presented was that marijuana is not as harmful as alcohol or tobacco. The counter to this was that prolonged and consistent exposure to this product could be “harmful to the user and to society.” Other arguments brought up were on the topic of the drug war in Mexico, saying that undermining sales of the drug cartels and putting them out of business with lower prices would be a positive effect of legalization.
    In my opinion, marijuana should be legalized. The product is already widely used by people in the first place, and legalizing it makes what many people do already acceptable. Police officers would spend less time catching people with marijuana and spend more time pursuing serious police matters. I agree with the argument stating that it is just as dangerous, maybe even more so, than alcohol and tobacco. I believe that as long as tobacco is allowed to be distributed to the citizens of America, marijuana should be too. If marijuana should not be legalized, then neither should tobacco. Tobacco kills an astonishing amount of its users, and is an addictive product, which is more than can be said or proved for marijuana. In short, the legalization of marijuana would not hurt us more than products that are already legal, and if anything, it may be able to help with matters such as the Drug War in Mexico.


    This past Wednesday, first lady Micelle Obama made an appearance in Milwaukee as her 2010 midterm debut and the first stop on a tour that White House strategists hope will be a high-impact political tour. Mrs. Obama’s highly personal, soft-sell appeal is intended to influence Democratic voters to forget whatever disappointment they have in Barack Obama and vote to “finish what we’ve started.” Mrs. Obama used her role as the “mom in chief” to identify Democrats as the party of families and children. At first, she was not eager to go out on the campaign trail; she likes to be home on weekends and part of the week to take care of her daughters. But with Democrats begging for her help, Mrs. Obama agreed to participate. Through her speeches, she does not intend to attack Republicans in any way, and she reminds her audience about the excitement on Inauguration Day, when the new president’s approval ratings were towering and the country was in a very hopeful mood.

    I’m glad Michelle Obama is doing this campaigning for the Democratic party. She gets the attention of women who maybe wouldn’t usually vote, and this will help inspire these women to take part in the government. I agree with her in the sence that “many of us, in 2008 expected to see all the change Obama talked about happen all at once, right away, but the truth is, it’s going to take longer to dig ourselves out of this hole than any of us would like”. The American’s need to realize this and give Obama the chance to put his plans into action.

    Cerys Humphreys
    7th period

  24. Gavin Welch
    Per 7

    Americans have a negative view on the Government. A survey by the Gallup polling organization and USA Today newspaper state that only 26 percent of Americans said they had a positive view of the US federal government. Nearly six in 10 have a negative view. The poll was conducted in August, when BP was struggling to plug a blown-out oil well in the Gulf of Mexico. Many Americans see the banking sector as one of the chief culprits behind the financial meltdown that led to the worst recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s.The findings were available just weeks before the November 2 elections, in which voters are expected to take away the Democratic Party's majority in the House of Representatives and give it to the Republicans. In the eyes of Americans, the computer industry is viewed favorably. Six in ten American liked the computer industry and just 11 percent saw dislike it.The next three most popular industries were linked to food: the restaurant farming and grocery sectors

    I don’t have a very positive view on the government. The Obama administration has done a very poor job of executing the many tasks that it has set out to do. Obama has run his whole campaign on the idea of “Hope”. How someone can run an entire government on the Idea of hope sees a little out there. According to the survey discussed earlier in this article, six in ten American think the same thing.

  25. The “don’t ask don’t tell” policy has been a topic of debate for a while now. This policy was established to ban gays from participating openly in the military. Some military officials agree with it but others do not. It is Congress’ decision of whether or not to keep this policy. The Pentagon asked Congress if they could wait until December to make their final decision on the matter so that they could investigate the subject, and give input as to what should be done. However, a judge in California ordered a rule that this policy was unconstitutional and should be eliminated immediately. Even though the Obama administration agrees with the elimination of this policy, they prefer to let Congress, and not the justice department, make a decision about this policy. In the past, gays have been allowed to partake in the military; they just couldn’t admit their sexuality. If this rule is changed, it would allow people of all sexualities to take part in the military openly. If the government goes through with this course of action, it would require gays to be dismissed from their military position.

    I highly disagree with this “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. I really don’t think a person’s sexuality should prevent them from serving their country. I think the right thing to do in this situation is to get rid of this policy because it is not beneficial to anyone. I really hope that Congress decides to eradicate this rule because it is unfair.,8599,2025411,00.html

    Laura Musalem
    period 6th


    Christine O'Donnell, Senate candidate for Delaware, said that she feels her views on evolution are "irrelevant" to her campaign. She believes that it is a myth and is nothing more than a theory, and she also believes that people are excepting it as fact too quickly. O'Donnell wants the local government and school districts to decide what to teach, not the federal government. She also has said that she does not want the federal government deciding whether or not schools can teach creationism in the classroom. She uses the defense that if humans evolved from monkeys, monkeys should not still exist.

    I don't agree with O'Donnell. I don't care if she believes in evolution or not, as that's her personal opinion. However, I don't think schools should be allowed to teach creationism. That's something that should be reserved to religious environments, not a school. Creationism almost always focuses on the Christian idea of God. There's more than one creation story in the world, and if a school is going to teach one, they should have to teach them all. It's easiest to just teach evolution, which is backed up by facts. I'm sure that in some areas of the country creationism would be taught more than in others, and I don't think we should make education different for students just depending on where they live. There are also scientific explanations for why monkeys exist, showing that O'Donnell does not know the concept of evolution that well.

    -Kate Boyd
    7th period

  27. This week I read about a debate between two Delaware politicians running for senator. Christine O’Donnell who is a Tea Party favorite is running against Chris Coons a democrat. Last month O’Donnell, a former abstinence counselor, beat out heavily favored Michael Castle in the Republican primary. Republican senior advisors don’t support her Christine O’Donnell but she is backed by Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. This is a key election and the Republicans don’t feel that she is a very good candidate to represent their party. Now Chris Coons, who once looked like a long shot is set to win the race. The article was about their debate. Apparently they traded jabs at each other all night. Many times Coons called O’Donnell stupid such as this “It was difficult for me to understand from her question what she was talking about.” This was in response to a question from O’Donnell on a company he owns. While Coons was mean O’Donnell didn’t seem to know what she was talking about. For example she couldn’t think of any recent Supreme Court decisions.
    Personally I think these people were just childish. They should be above trading insults with each other. Instead they should be presenting their views to the general public as a mature, responsible adult. Politics in the USA are messed up. Politicians are focused more upon making their opponent look bad rather than trying to win over the people.

  28. Riley Hutchison
    7th period

    In New York the race for govenor is getting more complicated every day. The 2 main canidates Paladino and Cuomo are vying for citizens votes, and Paladino has turned to badmouthing jewish leaders, and his opponent Cuomo. The other day when adressing Jewish leaders he said that children were "brainwashed" into thinging that homosexuality was "and equally valid and successful option". He waited 24 hours to make a public appology, which wasnt soon enough for gay advocates and Brian Ellner who is a representative for the Human Rights Campaign. Paladino claims that he is a "live-and-let-live person, who shares views on same sex marrige as president Obama". This seems to contradict his earlier statements, and makes him seem to be trying to gain the respect of gays so they will vote for him. Paladino slso stated that he will reach out to leaders of the gay commmunity to have them educate him. More that 50 protesters gathered outside Paladino's office, changing "Palidino must go!" and carrying signs that say "I wasnt brainwashed" and carrying Rainbow flags.

    This article showed me that politicians will really do anything to gain votes. They dont care whether they are offending people, or talking badly about opponents. In the end it is all about getting votes. He first stated that being gay wasnt acceptable or a successful option. He doesn't know what gay people are really like, and he made assumptions. Once the public reacted to his claims he was very quick to make sure that he made a public apology, so as not to lose too many votes. I think that the public should realize that when a person says something they usually mean it, and if they make an apology later they usually only do so to cover up what they said before. I have heard that politics is a dirty game, but this really proves it to me. Politicians are decent people, but sometimes the elections bring out the worst in them.


    Today senator hopeful John Boozman defended himself from the remarks of Senator Blanche Lincoln, who he’s running against for the senate position in Arkansas, on his military votes. Lincoln stated that Boozman routinely voted against veterans programs. Boozman shot back with saying that Lincoln left out key details about his votes, mainly focusing on ones that would put the public against him, such as opposing a bill that included repealing the ban on gay troops. Ironically, Boozman is a part of the House Veterans Affairs Committee.
    I think this is an example of how low politicians will go to win an election. Apparently, Lincoln’s political career is basically over if she loses this election. It also tells how if a politician doesn’t tell the whole truth about someone, it can make them look really bad, like Joseph McCarthy in the 1950’s. This is a no win situation, I think, for Lincoln. If she says this stuff about Boozman, she’s called a liar and desperate. If she doesn’t say things about Boozman, she will probably lose the election by a lot. But we’ll find out for sure on November 2.

    Mark Stouffer
    Period 7

  30. Midterm Elections are almost here, so there has been a lot of debate within all the candidates. Linda E. McMahon has had trouble in her election this year winning the votes from the women. Linda E. McMahon is a Republican running for the position of Senator for Connecticut. Her opponent’s name is Richard Blumenthal, the democratic nominee. At the moment, he is beating her with a two-to-one lead for the women votes. Many of the women of Connecticut are insulting McHahon on her over-advertising. Every time Dolores Meehan turns on her television, she sees McHahon’s political commercials, consisting an attack on her opponent. She is bothering many people, and this has caused many people to switch their votes. Another important turn off is McHahon’s involvement with World Wrestling Entertainment executive. People characterize it as, “cartoonish and demeaning depictions of women.” The majority of men seem to show interest in the fact that she played apart with the wrestling and want to take a picture with her. Having the wrestling situation, she tried to make herself look good by informing the people that she created many new jobs and helped build entertainment. McHahon is not the only one with the flaws, Richard Blumenthal too has his mistakes, which has lead to confusion for Connecticut and which side they should settle for. The elections are less than three weeks away, and we’ll see which side they actually chose.
    When people are running for a position, they need to try the hardest they can to get elected. I don’t think spending around ten million dollars should be the solution, but candidates have to find a way to get their selves known. During election time, reporters start to dig deeper and deeper into the people’s lives and find things that were covered for a long time. Even though this wrestling situation was in the open and cause for little digging, she probably regrets all this debate from the women. People are going to have their mistakes on both sides of the pole. The biggest turn off I think in a candidate is when they start abusing the other side. This shows they are desperate in winning the elections. Instead of residing with the insults, McHahon should of used the advertisement to discuss her own achievements. Even though she is behind in the election, she still has time to win if she keeps her head straight and stays positive.
    Stacey Cutrell Period 7

  31. This comment has been removed by the author.


    The Obama administration has been putting out mixed signals over the don't ask, don't tell policy and has caused the federal and the state government to clash. Even though Obama's administration is going to repeal the policy later, they have recently begun to defend the policy. The Court for the Central District of California has ordered the military to remove the don’t ask, don’t tell policy. The department of justice has tried to appeal this decision due to the fact the government normally backs Congress up. This mix up has caused the department of defense to stop their own investigation in the issue so they can quell the orders of The Court for the Central District of California.

    I find the actions of the government very baffling. The fact that they are trying to subdue the requests of The Court for the Central District of California while they are planning to do the exact same thing later just doesn’t make sense. They are creating more work for themselves and slowing down a process that truly needs to end. They should not do things just because it is tradition. They should have a solid reason behind their actions before they get mixed up in others actions.

    Jenny Vaughn
    Due 10/15/10
    Period 6


    Recently, the two candidates running for a Delaware Senate position sat through a very trying hour and a half debate. Christine O’Donnell, of the Tea Party, faced off against Chris Coons, a Democrat. The two parried back and forth, observed by a group of mediators. Coons runs the small county of New Castle, which under his supervision has achieved a triple-A bond rating, a feat that only 30 out of 3,000 American counties can boast. O’Donnell is relatively new to the world of politics. However, her personality and outspoken honesty on topics has lead to a rise in her popularity, such as her upset over moderate Michael N. Castle last month. As of a few weeks ago the results seemed crystal clear, though after last month’s upset nothing is for sure.

    I think that O’Donnell would be the best for the job. She is young and clearly willing to learn. She pointed out “she didn’t come from a privileged background.” She has had to work to get to the position that she is in today. Her upset over candidate Michael N. Castle proved that she has tremendous support from the citizens of Delaware. Castle has been winning elections in the state for the past forty years. Coons, although experienced, has been described as “mean-spirited”. He criticized O’Donnell heavily and tried to emphasize her flaws. While this is an election, the candidates should be showing the citizens who they are. Coons is certainly doing this and I believe that he is showing the wrong side of himself.

    Zach Visco
    October, 15, 2010
    Period 6

  34. Geoff Thomason
    Period 7

    A 1990's video almost has almost caused a Republican canidate the Delaware State election. Shockingly, Christine O'Donnel recently won the Republican primary election despit all of the negitive comments from the media, and desipite the opinion that the 1990's video has placed into voters' minds. In this video, O'Donnel talks about how she used to "dabble into witchcraft." This video immediately made people think that she was crazy and not the type of person that you would want to represent your state. This video also inspired the hit T.V. show Saturday Night Live to do a spoof on O'Donnel's first campaign ad. During the first campaign ad, O'Donnel adresses the old video simply by stating that she isn't a witch and then proceeds to give reasons and explanations for how foolish and young she was back then, but how much she has matured since then. Yesterday, the Delaware Senate debate was held, and in it O'Donnel and Democrat Chris Coons went head to head and it got a little disturbing. Both canidates discussed national issues and both were looking to come out on top, but O'Donnel was also looking to mend the cruel speculations people had about her. She also had to impress a decent number of people because she was behind by 19 points before the debate started. The debate became pretty intense and there was practically a verbal war between the two canidates. Some people still think that she is an uninformed clown, but others are starting to realize that maybe she knows what she's talking about. It will be interesting to see the outcome of the election.

    I have never heard Christine O'Donnel during a debate or give a speech, but judging on what the media proposes about her and what the majority of the population thinks, it doesnt sound to good for her chances of becoming a senator. To me it sounds like she is a relatively knowledgeable citizen, but would be a relatively uninformed senator. It also sounds like she is a bit impulsive and short tempered based on the comments she made towards Democratic Representitive, Chris Coons. Those don't seem like they are two of the best characteristics to have in a senator. I guess that I'm not informed enough to vote for or against O'Donnel, but it looks like the people who are voting aren't witch fans or O'Donnel fans either.


    Recently Michelle Obama has started a new campaign. She is being sent around by the democrats to "Blue" states to say that her husband has been trying as hard as he can and to not loose faith in him. She has not being using Obama's title as president, rather just calling him Barack. She is hoping to defend his agenda as well as pick up moral and re-energize the democrats to how they were when Obama just made it to office.

    I think Michelle shouldn't be interfering or trying to help out her husband in this way. To me it makes her come off as trying to steal his spotlight and being kind of snooty. I think she needs to be back at the White House with Obama and her kids, since while she is away then their kids don't really have the parents they need to help them grow up. Obama is too busy running the country, and now their mother is off campaigning. I don't think it's a good situation for the kids and I think Michelle needs to put her kids first.

  36. Thomas Nguyen
    10/14/10 Period 7

    With a little more than 2 weeks till elections, candidates that are Tea Party-endorsed are having a strong race with other candidates. This movement may establish a strong Republican hold within the House of Representatives and Senate; this may push the Republican agenda and derail the Democratic agenda. 8 Senator candidates have a good chance of winning their seats. The problem is that the majority of Tea Party candidates are running where Democrats control. The Tea Party candidates are mainly running in South Carolina, Massachusetts, and Arizona. Those candidates in Massachusetts are not expected to win. One of the main focuses of the Tea Party is to extend the Bush Administration's tax cuts permanently and to repeal the health care bill.

    Based on statistics, the Republican and the Tea Party are poised to break through and reclaim the House and Senate. If this becomes true, our country will move in a different direction. A lot of people right now believe that their taxes are just too high; they also see that our country is not moving in the right direction. Right now, I consider myself neutral. Tax cuts benefit taxpayers, but there are too many uncertainties within the Republican agenda. Some states and districts may become Republican instead of Democratic because voters are not satisfied with what they see.

  37. This comment has been removed by the author.

  38. This comment has been removed by the author.

  39. This comment has been removed by the author.

    According to this article, the federal government has started using Facebook as a way to monitor potential immigrants to the U.S. The government will create a fake profile and send requests to random people on Facebook to monitor them. Most people will accept a friend, even if they don't know them just because people like having more friends on Facebook than other people. The government will use the material that they gather to see if the immigrants really are "citizen quality". Any information that the government finds can be used to deny citizenship.
    This article made me stop and think, should this even be legal? Should our government really have the right to create a fake profile, friend random people, spy on them, and then say they aren't allowed to become citizens because of what they said on a social networking cite. The audacity of the government to even think of doing this, let alone doing it, sickens me. The government has absolutely no right to read people's public networking cites as a personality profile or as a pass or fail to enter the U.S. Many people joke around on their facebooks, they say things that aren't true or that they don't mean because people joke around on Facebook, that's just what they do. I like to have fun on my Facebook, say stupid things that aren't true and knowing that the government can go through and read that is just sickening. We have a right to privacy and a right to free speech, and if what we say on a social networking cite can cause the government to DENY us citizenship or use it as a way to monitor someone's personality is frightening. Facebook shouldn't be used as a way to deny citizenship, it's like telling someone they're arrested for aggravated assault because they wrote a song about wanting to hurt someone. The government would never trying using that as proof against someone, so why should they be allowed to use Facebook against a prospective immigrant?


    After many long years of being put back to the bottom of the stack someone rash-fully decided to tackle the issue, and I use this term very loosely, about gays in the military. This could not have been a worse time for them, they accrued a significant amount of dept for the organization, and in 2008 they had hurt the portfolios of their major donors, like many stockbrokers, they too didn't know how to react. On Tuesday a federal judge in California ordered the United States military to stop enforcing the 17 year old policy that bars openly allow gay men and women from serving in the armed forces. It was a surprise that in 2008 when the case had landed in the lap of Judge Virginia A. Phillips of Federal District Court for the Central District of California. Then Dan Woods, a partner of White & Case, decided to take the case after a colleague of his from the Log Cabin Republican presented it to him, and he had felt strongly that the policy violated the constitution. Mr. Woods claims that this will help the military and will not hurt it in anyway.

    But Barry Goldwater on the other hand looks at this from a rational point of view, he says “I don't care if they are gay or straight, as long as they can shot straight”. What good is a soldier who cowards at the thought of enemies? Are they stating that there aren't any gay men who are capable of protecting this nation? Take one of the six veteran witnesses Mr. Woods called upon to speak of their hardships they endured, he was an Air Force pilot who flew 61 combat missions in Iraq. His fellow pilots called him the “vapor”, I'm sure it is a very tough thing to do to earn a name such as the one he had obtained, tell me how many lives did he save when he fought? He put his own life on the line to protect the people who hate and detest people of his sexuality. How is this suppose to help our military in anyway? More than 12,000 worthy soldiers were dismissed because of this. 12,000 soldiers who would gladly give their lives in order to protect their country, but how is this protecting our country, actually no I think the question that should be asked is how is this protecting some of our soldiers? Because I'm sure that many of these gay men are more than capable of saving a partner.

  42. This comment has been removed by the author.


    Will Marijuana be legal in California? Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law that owning an ounce or less of marijuana will only result in a fine about the amount of a traffic ticket. Proposition 19 that might be present on the November ballot states that people in California can grow their own marijuana for personal use. This proposition will also allow every city and county in California to regulate their own sales on marijuana. Schwarzenegger signed the law on a lower fine on marijuana, hoping to make Proposition 19 not such a big deal.

    I think that California should legalize marijuana. Of course there are the ups and downs, but I think that legalizing it will create less crime and sneaking around. If they keep the drug illegal, then people will be selling it illegally and using it anyways. Just like the prohibition of alcohol that happened a long while back, I think that it is best that we do legalize marijuana so that people aren’t going crazy and doing bad things to get it. I look at this issue like a chocolate cake: if you tell a little boy he can’t have the cake, he will steal the cake and eat as much of it has he can. If you let the boy have some cake, He will be satisfied with the piece you give him. I think that legalizing marijuana will make crime rates go down and create less tension. I don’t think that it will influence too many more people to do it because the people that care about themselves won’t do it even if it is legal; like cigarettes.


    There has been a multi-state lawsuit against the federal health care law. Federal Judge Roger Vincon let the case proceed. He rejected the Obama administration’s request to dismiss the case. The lawsuit is being led by Attorney Bill McCollum, who is representing this challenge from the 20 states. McCollum, hailing the decision as a "victory," said the move shows the significance of the states' challenge.

    I agree with what the judge has done. This health care plan has too many negatives to it. I have done some research on this health care plan. There will be a negative impact on jobs and the economy if this plan goes through. Also, children with pre-existing conditions are not covered by the health plan! This is wrong in my eyes. Lastly, Democratic leadership and staff are exempt from this healthcare plan! Obviously, if this was a good plan, the Democrats would want it to apply to them too. This plan sounds like it will not be a good one, and the judge made the right choice to oppose it.

    Chris Barth
    7th Period


    Jessica Yin

    The "battles" between Democrats and Republicans have been pretty common and frequent,this time is about their commercial fund.For gaining more support on the Election Day,the democrats collected $15.9 million to spend on television advertising,and the republicans only collected $11.2 million.However,republicans are getting help from the groups of people who are erasing the money edge that democrats collected for their ability of controlling the House.
    I always forgot the power of media,that can make the good commercials that are proposed,even change impossible to possible.Obviously the democrats want to use this power to gain the higher amount of supporters than the republicans.I think that the TV advertising only gives the effect of assistance,it cannot change the reality,that what people see about and how they think of democrats,so it's good that they have the financial ability to gain the support,but it's better to gain the support without heavy costs on advertisement, but the party groups should not have inserted themselves into half-republican candidates just for the commercial advantage and bashing the democrats.We still need fairness.


    Prop 19 is a proposition which, if passed, will result in any Californian at or above the age of 21 being able to grow marijuana for their own personal use. Also, it will allow cities and counties to lay down their own regulations, taxing, and retail sales of marijuana. Governor Schwarzenegger hopes that his signing of a a law that will cause anyone found with an ounce or less of marijuana to be fined will be enough to derail Prop 19. The results of the vote seem as though they will be incredibly unpredictable, maybe depending on who actually votes, so for now, all that can be done is to get out there and vote, for anyone who cares about the proposition.

    I absolutely believe that marijuana should be legalized. Both alcohol and tobacco cause an outstanding number of deaths year round, while marijuana is far less dangerous. Actually, marijuana can be used for medical purposes. A friend of mine, whose father died of cancer a few years ago, makes a very good point about this. If his father had been provided with medical marijuana while he was suffering, their family could have saved thousands of dollars (which could have been used to help cure him), and it would have made his quality of life would have vastly improved. As I see it, anyone who is 18 or over can buy cigarettes and eventually kill themselves with them, so why not let adults buy marijuana and potentially make themselves happier and healthier people? Also, underground marijuana sales are a large part of California's economy, therefore, moving these sales above ground and imposing a tax would stimulate the economy even further. I believe Proposition 19 should, and hopefully will, pass in California.

    Kim Rubish
    6th Period


    In the elections coming up there are many Tea Party candidates running for office, especially in the House and the Senate. This radical Republican-leaning party believes in strictly upholding constitutional values. According to their members, because the constitution does not directly call for the departments of education, agriculture, interior, transportation, energy, etc, they should be eliminated. They also believe in replacing income tax with a flat tax, getting rid of entitlements, and scrapping the estate tax. The radical views of this party have caused many people to wonder what effect their running will have. Contrary to many predictions, several members are likely to be elected, a few of them in Democratic states. Some, however, have had the predicted effect and hurt the Republican parties chances considerably. Delaware and Massachusetts are examples of this.

    I think that the Tea Party’s beliefs are wrong. They keep the rich richer and make in even harder than it already is for lower- and middle-class people to gain a better standing. I think it is a problem that so many Tea Party candidates are doing well. Many of the people voting for them would be hurt by their political views. The people should be educated to know exactly what they are voting for. But there is another problem: with the Tea Party reforms, the Department of Education could be eliminated, making it even harder for poorer people to gain the information they need to be informed voters. The Tea Party believes in the constitution, but what they don’t seem to realize is that we live in the present; times have changed, and we need to stay progressive instead of stepping backwards more than two hundred years.

    Chiara Salemi


    History may be made this election year in Delaware. The democratic candidate is leading by double digits and considering that there has not been a democratic candidate in Delaware in 17 years this could be large shift. President Obama and Biden are supporting with John Carney in his campaign. Original republican Mike Castle is retiring which allows this change to be made.
    I think that is a great thing that this democratic candidate may win the race. I think that change is always good so I hope it will work out. It was very surprising to me to find out that there hasn’t been a change in 17 years. Overall I think this would be a great thing for Democrats and Americans in general

    Jack Haskins
    7th Period


    Jackson Wright
    6th Period

    This article is about the Tea Party and it's massive following beginning to have an influence in the nation's politics. This Tea Party movement began in 2009 when locally organized protests began to bond together and make attacks on liberal ideas. The protests were partially in response to several Federal laws: the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and a series of health care reform bills. These liberal ideas, turned bills, all passed under the Obama administration. Despite being proven a positive for the country, the Tea Party movement still disapproves them. Many people consider the Tea Party movement to be uneducated conservatives, and I agree with these people. I'm hoping, along with other democrats, that the Tea Party will split up the Republican party and cause infighting, enough to the point that the Republicans collapse before the election day and keep the Republicans from winning back senate seats and even taking the presidency in 2012. I think more conservative influence could really hurt this country because at this point in time, the liberals have us on the track to recovery after the awful Bush administration. The Tea Party is based on the conservatives that want a more religious, pure, movement, but many are considered to be taking it too far, and this could hurt them or help them depending on the more middle of the line conservatives response to them.

  50. This comment has been removed by the author.


    With an election less than a month away, we are hearing and seeing campaign ads everywhere. Whether its on the television, or on the radio, the men and women running for election are filling our minds with positive things about themselves, and negative things about the men and women running against them. Sadly, a lot of the negative information about their opponents is often false, or exaggerated. They often tell the truth, but leave out important, major factors. For example, Democrats blame Republicans for wanting to tax groceries, SUVs, and teddy bears. However, the Democrats aren't telling the people that in return for these taxes, payroll and estate taxes would vanish.

    I think that when candidates associates their name with an ad that gives false, partial, or exaggerated messages to the people, it just makes the candidate putting out the false ad look worse. It's understandable that in order to win and election, you not only have to give positive information about yourself, but negative information about your opponent. When you add a couple "pros" to your name, you need to add a "con" to theirs. However its unacceptable when three fourths of a candidate’s ad drones on about how terrible their opponent is. For the majority, you should brag about yourself. The fact that you are confident in yourself and what you've done will make you look like not only the better person, but also the better candidate. The people want confident, secured leaders.

    Julie Wulforst
    Period 6