Sunday, December 4, 2011
7th period: Current Event due 12/9
Great job with your current events last week. I think that those House and Senate floor debates served as great reminders for your homework. :) This week in class, we will be bringing the Legislative Branch to a close and gearing up for the Executive Branch. In honor of these fantastic topics, you will chose an article dealing with Congress/General Assembly or the Presidency. This includes, but is not limited to, information about legislators, specific pieces of legislation, actions of President Obama or the GOP candidates/debates. Have a great week and do not forget that we have a test on the Legislative Branch (Thursday for 4th and 6th and Friday for 7th). STUDY! :)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Juno Park 7th period
ReplyDeleteGingrich stands by anti-child labor law comments
Chris Welch
CNN.com 12/1/2011
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/01/gingrich-stands-by-anti-child-labor-law-comments/
Newt Gingrich, a Republican presidential candidate, currently still holds firm in his beliefs against child-labor laws. He recently said "Really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works," he seems to by implying that poor children only get money to survive by illegal means like stealing. His skewed mind believes that children who start working from an early age are more likely to become successful; this thought comes from his own personal experience. Another thing that Gingrich said was that he thinks children and students should start working as janitors at schools and taking up other small jobs. "Then we get down to the janitor thing," Gingrich continued, in reference to his previous comments. "(I received) letters written that said janitorial work is really hard and really dangerous and this and that. OK, fine. So what if they became assistant janitors and their job was to mop the floor and clean the bathroom. And you paid them." All of these comments were made by Gingrich himself, but he tried to say that they were exaggerated by “the left”.
My first thought after reading this article was disbelief. Does this mad man know what he is talking about? First of all Gingrich seems to believe that poor children only steal to get money, which is a nasty generalization that only someone of minimal intelligence could ever come up with. The child-labor laws were put into place to prevent working for a reason: so that kids could learn and reach better paying jobs as adults. Having side jobs would take away time from studies and adversely harm grades. Also, the jobs that kids can hold are completely unrewarding and would pay very little, not to mention where would the money come from? To pay child janitors you would either have to come up with more money for the schools or reduce pay for the people who already clean the school. These men and women most likely have kids to feed and with a minimum wage job struggle at that. Paying kids to do a worse job of it makes absolutely no sense. Gingrich is a possible presidential candidate; do you want your children to work, America? His idea’s on child-labor are un-American and are more suited to a communist nation like China, maybe sweatshops are his thing, who knows. Even if kids were to work, what would it accomplish and how would we pay them? They would perform sub-par to adults and take away jobs from hard-working Americans who need to feed their families. The money would come from the school budget which can barely pay teachers, so paying students is out of the question. Not in this economy, Not in America. This relates to the executive branch because he is a presidential candidate.
Erin Peck
ReplyDeleteNorth Carolina General Assembly Votes To Repeal Landmark Racial Justice Law
By Guest Blogger on Nov 29, 2011 at 5:10 pm
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/11/29/377897/nc-general-assembly-repeals-landmark-racial-justice-law/
This week the senate of the North Carolina general assembly voted to effectively repeal the Racial Justice Law. This law was put in place so that imamates that felt there cases were ruled unfairly on the bases of race could repeal their cases. This was signed into law August of 2009. Now it was been repealed in the senate. It seems as if there reason for repeal are that the law could release criminals back onto the streets and clog up the courts with unnecessary and expensive case.
This is so disappointing. It’s okay to deny people their right to a fair jury and a fair trial because you don’t want to pay for it or take the time to go back and right a wrong? Your moral compass has got to be pretty messed up to not see how terrible that is. We live in North Carolina were racism runs deep; I guess it is crazy to think we could rise above that in our justice system. When the law was put in to action in 2009 it seemed like a pretty big step forward for us. Now its just disappointing to see that we haven’t and don’t seem able to change. That we cant put our political differences aside and do what is right for our people. This is not a matter of democrat or republican, it’s a matter of treating people equally. “Liberty and justices for all”, we say this every morning in school, but what a lie it is. I guess what gets me even more is that even if Bev Perdue vetoes it; it is likely to be overridden. Criminals are not model citizens but its possible that some who have been labeled as one are not anything of the sort. For example, Darryl Hunt, a black man who served 19 years in prison for a crime he did not commit. Stuff like this makes me not so proud to be an American. Maybe that is a tad extreme but it for sure breaks my faith in government and the politics that surround it.
Jack Kleissler 7th period
ReplyDeleteObama in Kansas slams Republicans over inequality
Mark Mardell
BBC.com 12/6/11
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16061185
This past week President Obama gave a speech in Kansas addressing his thoughts on how Republicans in Washington are dealing with the economy. Recently he has been pressing for his American Jobs Act to pass but this time he took a break and decided to critique the Republicans. He stated that the Republicans think that we are better off on our own, fending for themselves by their own rules. He strongly disagreed with their views. He said that the trickle down theory does not work and its what got us into the great depression and the current recession. He called for Congress to pass an extension of a payroll tax cut which is set to expire at the end of 2011. All in all Obama focused on the inequalities of income in America.
What I noticed during from watching the Presidents speech and reading about it after wards, he is trying to relate and appear similar to President Roosevelt. This could work very well for him since Roosevelt is most well known for getting America out of the great depression and leading them to years of prosper. He is attacking the Republicans and I feel as though he is campaigning more than he is actually trying to get bills past. Attacking people that works when running for President but when you need them to get things accomplished in Congress it does nothing. I would have rather seen Obama lay out a plan to help lessen the inequality of income with Americans than attack Republicans about their plan.
Jason Cohn Period 7
ReplyDeleteGingrich, Romney prepare for January collision By: Dan Balz, Amy Gardner and Philip Rucker
Washington Post 12/7/11
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gingrich-romney-prepare-for-january-collision/2011/12/07/gIQAlaHcdO_story.html
Newt Gringrich and Mitt Romney are the leaders of the Republican presidential nomination. They have been ignoring and avoiding each other for most of the year, but this must end soon because they will be going against each other in several primaries starting in January. About a month or two ago, there was a strong push for Gingrich over Romney. Advisers believe that Romney must be open to the media and have a sharper economic message that contrasts with Gingrich's if he wants to come out on top. Gingrich's main problem is that he is lacking money compare to Romney and must raise more money while hiring more people to run organizations in different states. He is looking for endorsements from many congressmen that weren't happy with him as Speaker of the House in the 1990s. Five states have their primary election in January and February. Romney is favored in two of them while Gingrich is favored in two others.
I find it interesting that Newt Gingrich had such a strong surge above Mitt Romney so quickly even though he is lacking money. I think Gingrich will win the primary election because he has more experience as a leader in congress as Speaker of the House. I think it will be a close election and it will only be decided by a few states.
On Wednesday, G.O.P lawmakers pressed the Obama administration to take an Iranian group known as the M.E.K. off of a list of terrorist organizations. In addition, about 3,400 members of the M.E.K. ground should be resettled once released from confinement in a camp in Iraq.
ReplyDeleteThe Republican legislators said that Iraq’s close ties to Iran put the residents of the M.E.K. group camp, known as Camp Ashraf, in danger. There have already been two incursions by Iraqi security forces that killed dozens of people. Legislators demanded that the Obama administration commits to a safety guarantee for the people in Camp Ashraf. Representative Dana Rohrabacher pointed out to the administration that without such guarantees, there is a much higher risk that the entire camp will be massacred by Iraqi forces. She gives press the quote; “The blood in the sand will stain the Gucci shoes of those in the State Department.” In translation, Rohrabacher basically says; ‘we wouldn’t want to make a dent in our reputation by not upholding our promises.’
Despite the fact that the M.E.K. has indeed committed terrorist crimes against Americans in the 1970s, it appears that a decision has been made to put the past aside and work towards a new age of peace that will hopefully, in the end, cut off almost all terrorist actions towards the U.S. for good. Removing and relocating the people of Camp Ashraf in a humane and secure way is entirely possible, it is just going to take a lot of hard work and cooperation from all sides.
Even though this may sound odd at first, I am actually okay with them relocating a former terrorist group. I feel like terrorism comes from a lot of fear and misunderstanding of other cultures, and that it can be prevented if we as human beings opened up to each other instead of criticizing other ethnic groups, races, cultures, and any other stereotypically slandered practice or way of life. There are people who simply observe a persons skin color or the way they talk for a moment, and then, in that moment, decide that the person is a terrorist. We dehumanize other people based on what we have been taught to believe and fear. I feel deeply that this is wrong. We need to learn to get over our feelings of fear or hatred and work on becoming closer and uniting not as a nation, but as a world nation.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/08/world/middleeast/republicans-want-iranian-group-mek-off-terror-list.html?ref=us
Published: December 7, 2011
Article: G.O.P. Lawmakers Want Iranian Group Off Terrorism List
By: Ginger Thompson
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/08/obama-to-mark-end-iraq-war-with-speech-to-troops/
ReplyDeleteFox News
Sam Dunson
Published December 08, 2011
Associated Press
Obama is planning to make a speech this week that will thank all of the members of our armed forces for their work in Iraq. Obama has ended the war and started to bring all of the troops home. All troops will be returned home by the end of the year and the president plans to speak directly to them and their families at Fort Bragg military base in North Carolina. The first lady and the vice president will also accompany Obama at his speech to the soldiers. To comemerate to end of the war Joe Biden and Obama will also attend the Army vs. Navy football, which is a long standing tradition.
I think that it is a good idea for Obama to speak to his soldiers and go to the football game. The soldiers need to be honored for their services to our country and the president should be the one that gives them that respect. The president also needs to go to Army vs. Navy game as another way respect what our soldiers have done for our country and its freedom. Its also a good idea for him to go give the long history of the rivalry between army and navy, which means that it will probably be a good game.
Luthfi Bustillos 7th period
ReplyDelete“Make-or-break” for middle class
Mark Mardell
BBC news December 6th 2011
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16061462
President Obama went to Kansas to raise the stakes of the upcoming elections. He said he wants “American values” back. Obama said that right now is the defining moment of the debate of tax on middle class. He said that the trickery theory of the Republicans that when the rich gets richer everybody get rich, has never worked. Obama made this speech in Kansas on purpose and his goal was to remind people of Roosevelt’s message in 1910 of “nationalism”. Obama is trying to suggest that he is the defender of the middle class and the Republicans as the leaders of unfair privilege.
I think that Obama was correct to make this speech in Kansas. In the past four years he has been too passive and this has led to criticism but by making this speech Obama is showing his opponents that he intends to win the election in 2012 November. I think Obama is trying to get the middle class on his side during the elections. Obama knows that the middle class are the class he needs to get on his side during the Elections next year.
Jonah Horwitz
ReplyDelete7th period
Obama: This is ‘make or break moment’ for middle class
By David Jackson/USA Today
December 8, 2011
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/12/obama-this-is-make-or-break-moment-for-middle-class/1
A couple days ago, President Obama came to Osawatamie, Kan to hold a speech. He explained a solution of the middle class shrinking due to income inequality. The gap between the upper and middle class have been gaping hugely due to the rich getting richer while the middle class having trouble. Obama thinks that we should invest more in education, science and infrastructure to help this middle class problem. He also mentioned again about his ideas that the wealthy should pay a higher share of taxes. Anger about this gap between the upper and middle class led the protests all around the US. He then ended it by saying that America should work together, Republican or Democrat, to help get rid of the problems.
I agree with Brobama as I always do. This guy has good ideas. With education being more focused on so everyone can be more successful and achieve there dreams. Also, why not pay more if your rich, your helping your country. I'm also not saying that these protests are right, but the middle class problem does need to attract awareness to get everything straight. If the republicans stop their b****in and work together with everyone, our country would work a lot smoother.
Heading:
ReplyDelete-Stefan Steiner/7th period
-Obama Endorses Decision to Limit Morning-After Pill / Jackie Calmes and Gardiner Harris
-The New York Times / December 8, 2011
- http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/us/obama-backs-aides-stance-on-morning-after-pill.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Paragraph #1:
-On Thursday, Barack Obama endorsed the decision to stop over-the-counter sales of an after-sex contraceptive pill to girls under the age of 17. Obama said that the decision was made by Kathleen Sebelius, his secretary of health and human services, whom he later stated that he fully supported. On Wednesday Kathleen Sebelius had overruled a study done by The Food and Drug Administration that claimed the morning-after Plan B one-step pill was safe and should be sold without a prescription to those under 17. Obama said that she made the decision based on the concern that a 10-year old or an 11-year-old could purchase drugs that could have an “adverse effect” if not used properly. Obama’s actions caused speculation that it was purely a political move and some democratic and women’s rights groups became upset.
Paragraph #2:
-I disagree with Obama’s actions. He blatantly went against his very own previous ideas that science should come before politics. His selfish actions will lead to many unwanted births that could have been easily prevented. Obama claims that he was concerned over the fact that girls could purposefully use these drugs in an abusive manner but I believe that if this was the case girls would choose different drugs. Obama may have saved himself a little political trouble and prevented a few stupid kids from overdosing on contraceptive pills, but in the process he left many young women helpless and soon-to-be thrust into the responsibility of being a mother.
Oskar Marszalek 7th Period
ReplyDeleteRepublicans Unveil Plan for Payroll Tax
December 8, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/us/politics/house-republicans-unveil-plan-to-extend-payroll-tax-cut.html?ref=politics#
House Republicans announced that they would continue with a bill that would cut an employee's share of payroll tax. The Republicans plan on paying for this bill through a variety of pay freezes for federal workers as well as changes to entitlement programs. The bill also includes a provision to speed construction of the "Keystone XL" oil pipeline- a seven billion dollar project connecting oil rich Canadian sands to the Gulf of Mexico. The bill additionally includes modifications to the Environmental Protection Agency's rules limiting toxic air pollutants from commercial and industrial boilers.
Although the bill aims to improve American businesses by reducing taxes on employers, the Keystone XL pipeline and air pollution regulations may do more harm than good for Americans. Ideally, the pipeline would create American jobs from Montana to the Gulf, and businesses would prosper from reduced regulation, the environmental impacts from the bill are, as one scientist describes, "a game over for the planet." However, I do agree with the proposed cuts to certain entitlements.
Peter Norwood
ReplyDeleteThe New York Times
Obama Endorses Decision to Limit Morning-After Pill
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/us/obama-backs-aides-stance-on-morning-after-pill.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fpolitics%2Findex.jsonp
Summary: President Obama has no endorsed the decision to limit the Morning-After Pill to females only above the age of 17. He believes that it is not safe for girls as young as 10 to use this drug properly. This is unusual for President Obama, considering pro birth control is a socially liberal belief. Nancy Pelosi did not endorse or criticize this decision. Socially conservative groups have applauded this decision.
Response: This is ridiculous. Saying a girl who has the chance of becoming pregnant under the age of 17 cannot use the Morning-After Pill first off morally wrong. It is not safe for a young girl to use this drug? You know what else isn’t safe? Being pregnant as a teenager; that is what isn’t safe. This also is infringing on America’s personal liberties. The role of our national government is to protect the liberties of American citizens. By forcing young girls that had unprotected sex, or an accident happened resulting in the need for Plan B, to have to become pregnant or get an abortion is un-American. Whether or not you believe that using Plan B is a moral decision is one thing, but having young girl’s lives ruined by a pregnancy seems much more immoral to me. Plan B > Abortions. Plan B > Unwanted pregnancies.
Brian Mack/ 7th Period
ReplyDeletePaul campaign calls Trump debate "wildy inappropriate"/ Kevin Liptak
CNN.com/ 12/3/11
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/03/paul-campaign-calls-trump-debate-wildly-inappropriate/
Republicans Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman have declined invitations to Donald Trump’s presidential debate on December 27th. Both candidates are concerned with that Trump’s affiliation in the debate will distract the viewers from the important issues of the campaign such as: the economy and the governments debt. Ron Paul issued a statement saying that he has declined the invitation due to Trump’s lack of respect by toying with the decision to run for president. Trump shot back at Paul by saying, “he has a zero chance of winning either the nomination or the Presidency.” Jon Huntsman choose not to attend the debate because he believes that the Republican Party deserves an actual discussion on their issues, so voters will not re-elect President Obama.
I believe that Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman are doing the right thing by choosing not to participate in the debate due to the fact that Donald Trump is taking shots at them as nominees for the Republican Party. It’s extremely childish of Trump to say that he is excited that neither candidate will be attending the debate because they were going to waste the viewer’s time with their presidential ideas. I hope that this nonsense can end here, and that both sides will stop issuing statements that are disrespectful towards each other.
Cameron Baker/ 7th Period
ReplyDeleteRick Perry’s ‘Strong’ Campaign Ad Gets the Web Angry — and Laughing
Time.com/ 12/9/2011
http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/12/09/rick-perrys-strong-campaign-ad-gets-the-web-angry-and-laughing/
Tuesday earlier this week, Texas governor and presidential hopeful Rick Perry released his ad titled "Strong" on Youtube. This add opens with him talking in a field, sharing his views on religion. Although other nominees have also run a somewhat religion based campaign, he easily comes off most strongly. Rick Perry went on to compare religion with another highly controversial topic, saying "I’m not ashamed to admit that I’m a Christian, but you don’t need to be in the pew every Sunday to know there’s something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military but our kids can’t openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school". Rick Perry must have expected a lot of attention from this add, but received not what he had hoped for. The internet lashed back with over 400,000 dislikes (more than Rebecca Black's "Friday"), and countless humorous "remixes" mocking the video. The comments are harsh and plentiful, along with the attention. This is not Rick Perry's first screw up, as he was already known to be forgetful and incorrect in past speeches and debates.
Any slim chance of receiving the nomination Rick Perry still had was thrown out the window with this campaign ad. This ad brought to light what is Rick Perry, and people are finally cementing that they don't like him much at all. It was a huge mistake for this ad to be published, Rick Perry clearly didn't know what he was getting into. His views on religion could have been expressed in a much less controversial manner, but for some reason they were not. I think that this campaign mistake truly deserves all the negative attention it is receiving.
Olivia Clayton 7th Period
ReplyDeleteDecember 9, 2011
We Can't Wait: President Obama Takes Action to Improve Quality and Promote Accountability in Head Start Programs
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/11/08/we-cant-wait-president-obama-takes-action-improve-quality-and-promote-ac
Yesterday, Barack Obama announces the important steps to improve the quality of services and accountability at Head Start centers across the country.This reform will help direct taxpayer dollars to programs that provide high-quality Head Start services and ensure Head Start programs provide the best available early education services to children in every community.Over the next three years, the Department of Health and Human Services will review the performance and program quality of all Head Start grantees. Those that don’t meet the quality benchmarks will be required to compete for continued funding.
I think this is a good thing that Obama is doing for the country. He is being a really good president because he cares and wants to change how things are.
Jayson Williams
ReplyDelete7th Period
Lines Redrawn, Longtime Allies Fight for a Seat
By:Jennifer Steinhauer
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/us/politics/lines-redrawn-longtime-allies-fight-for-a-seat.html?_r=1&ref=politics
For a decade two House representaives Brad Sherman and Howard L. Berman, had been working cordially over their redrawn congressional districts. Now the war has started over they both won the re-election. They are now fighting over the same seat in the primary House. This fight is so hard for both men since they are both friends. They have been arguing over pressing issues in the world.
I think that whoever wins the race, both parties will be upset. This is a tough situation for everyone especially friends. It is still a lot better for them both to be from the same party, so they can hopefully fight fair.
Eric Reinstein, period 7
ReplyDeleteRick Perry's anti-gay focus is divisive even to staff
Richard A. Oppel
December 8, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/us/politics/perrys-anti-gay-rights-focus-is-divisive-even-to-staff.html?_r=1&ref=politics
On Wednesday, Rick Perry, Governor of Texas and possible Republican presidential nominee of 2012, released a campaign ad. The ad states that he believes it is wrong that gays can serve openly in the military, but there is no organized prayer in schools. He also criticizes Obama's support in gay rights and says that his administration is at war with religion.
Personally, I find it ridiculous that in 2011, we're still arguing about gay rights and the separation of church and state. I don't have a problem with gays, nor Christians, nor Mormons, nor their beliefs, but to deny someone basic rights such as marriage is unbelievable. The fact that a presidential nominee is supporting this is insane. Rick Perry is screwed, and he knows he'll never be president. Obama is doing the right thing in supporting gay rights, and obviously, Rick Perry needs to read the Constitution, because I'm pretty sure there's a thing or two about equality and the separation of church and government. I sincerely hope someone as crazy as this never gets a chance to be president of our nation.
Justus Heizer, period 7
ReplyDeletePoll: Voters want to throw 'em out
December 9, 2011
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/09/poll-voters-want-to-throw-em-out/?iref=allsearch
According to a vote that was taken on friday 3/4 of voters said that congress workers should lose their jobs. the other 20 percent said that they should be re-elected. This is the lowest recorded in years. Although most people want congress men to be kicked off the congress board they dont want their party members to be kicked off.
This is very hypocritical these voters want new congress members but they dont where their party top leave. So this says that they want the opposing team to leave but theirs stay. This is like saying that 2 soccer teams are playing but one team says that they should leave and then if they got what they wanted then they would have to give up and the other team would win. This is not how a government to be if new people are voted into office then they wont be up to date with everything that everyone already had don e and they would have to adapt to themselves being in office. We would have to take time to start up new bills and laws.
Jeremy Howell 7th
ReplyDeleteDec. 9th 2011
CNN http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/08/rnc-chair-takes-issue-with-trump-debate/
Perry Declines Trump Debate Invite
The Real estate Emperor and former possible presidential nominee Donald Trump has been trying for several weeks to orchestrate a debate between the republican presidential nominees. Trump had planned on being the moderator for the event, but now it seems that trump will have no one to moderate. Recently Governor Rick Perry joined the list of nominees that will not be attending the debate. This list includes all the front runners, such as: Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Michelle Bachman and Jon Huntsman. According to one source, the nominees are scared of attending a debate headed by a man that could possibly become a nominee.
I believe that these nominees could go to the debate or not go and it still wouldn’t matter. None of theses individuals are going to become president. President Obama won the election when Governor Chris Christy decided not to run. Christy will run in the next election and he will become president. I’m not sure if trump will run as an independent. He had me fooled when he said earlier in the year he might run; now I don’t know. He is either sizing up the competitors or he is looking for someone to endorse. I think he is sizing up the competitors. He wants to have a chance to moderate them and then go on TV and express his opinions on what was said. He could easily have someone brief him about the right person to endorse. People like trump only do things publically for a reason. If he is not trying to give his ideas in the interviews after the debate, what reason does he have?
Luke Ciocca 7th period
ReplyDeleteRomney ad attacks Obama's jobs-creation record
12/9/2011 USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-12-08/romney-ad-in-iowa/51753730/1
Gregory Korte
This article discusses an ad that was made by the political campaign crew of Mitt Romney. The 3.1 million ad aired in Iowa and was criticizing the job-creation record of Barrack Obama. The article not only throws mud at Obama but it also raises Romney’s status. The ad scrip goes as such: "How many jobs did Barack Obama create as a community organizer? As a law professor? Maybe now you see the problem. Mitt Romney turned around dozens of American companies and helped create thousands of jobs. He rescued an Olympics hit by scandal, took over a state facing huge deficits — and he turned it around without raising taxes, vetoing hundreds of bills. And Mitt has a detailed plan to turn around America's economy. Mitt Romney." The article goes on to describe about how accurate the article is. Romney indeed helped in the 2002 scandal during the Olympics, but his part in the affair seems greatly overstated and exaggerated. On the context of creating jobs, it shows that Romney had partial ownership with Bain Capital. With partnership with the company he used leveraged buyouts to buy up struggling companies and ended up posting record numbers of jobs. However, many sources also say that it may seem good on the outside, but inside sources of bought up companies say that their companies have bleed out as many 700 jobs due to Rodney’s corporations. Romney did also not raise taxes, but he did increase fees and closed corporate loopholes to raise 700 million.
Overall, Romney’s claims seem legitimate, but when you take a closer look it show the ways that Romney went about the changes. Some of the things he to tried to increase jobs were good but the way he went about it by cutting others jobs seems somewhat sly and cunning. Also by putting out this ad, Romney has already started the mud-slinging campaign war about a year in advance of the election. By making the statement early about President Obama and criticizing his work in office, he has not made himself look as the honorable and great person he is making himself out to be. It also seems that he want to continuously overstate his points about specific thing that he’s done rather than making multiple examples about the things he’s done. He prefers instead to focus on specific topic that, in my opinion, aren’t too well backed up
Katie Alexander 7th
ReplyDeleteCain leaves door open to media gig
Ashley Killough
CNN.com/December 8th, 2011
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/08/cain-leaving-door-open-to-media-gig/?hpt=hp_bn3
Former GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain, who suspended his campaign, announced he’s considering ways to keep his voice heard in the presidential process. Cain is the former Godfather's Pizza executive. He suspended his campaign after facing questions about an alleged extramarital affair and multiple allegations of sexual misconduct. Cain said there's no chance he will come back as a candidate, but he said he still plans on maintaining a “vocal” presence and continue speaking about his 9-9-9 plan. Cain also mentioned he'll take his time to make an endorsement in the GOP race.
Herman Cain reminds me somewhat of Sarah Palin. Cain, like Palin, was an unqualified person running for office. It sickens me that he will probably make tons of money by going on Fox News to try to keep his 9-9-9 plan alive. I feel the best plan for Herman Cain is to go home, and do something he is good at- like making pizza.
Aaron Smith/7th period
ReplyDeleteCNN
Cain leaves door open for media gig
Ashley Killough
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/08/cain-leaving-door-open-to-media-gig/?hpt=hp_bn3
Herman Cain recently announced that he was going to end his campaign for president. He was accused of sexual harassment and having an affair with his wife. This seems to be reason why he stopped running because he was embarrassing himself and his family. Although Cain will be out of the race for president, he will still be around as he said that he still wants to be present in the media. Many people believe that Cain was a joke candidate and was never a serious contender.
I found this article very interesting and I'm glad I read it. I believe that it was good that Cain dropped out because he obviously not going to win and no one took him seriously. If he had continued to run I think that he would have just exposed his personal life even more and would have generated a lot if hate. I also believe that he should just stay out of the media completely because I honestly think that no one cares to hear about him, or maybe that's just my opinion.
Kiara Luna/ 7th period
ReplyDelete12/9/11
White House rejects Republican payroll tax proposal
http://news.yahoo.com/white-house-rejects-republican-payroll-tax-proposal-192618315.html
The White House rejected Friday the latest proposal from Republicans in Congress on a payroll tax cut. He said that its costs had to be balanced away and not with budget cuts exempting the rich. Republicans have projected that the payroll tax cut be paid for with an expansion of a pay freeze for federal workers changes to civilian federal retiree benefits and other reforms, including gradual increases in Medicare health premiums for the elderly and a clampdown on assistance to illegal immigrants. They have also wanted to tie the payroll tax extension to the approval of TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline. The State Department has postponed a decision on that project until 2013 to give more time to study an alternate route for the pipeline: also to address environmental concerns. Republicans have accused Obama of approaching for that holdup for political reasons to evade upsetting his Democratic base ahead of the November 2012 presidential vote.
I agree with Obama. It doesn’t make sense to me to cut some taxes if that means taking the money to do it from the people. It would more fair if the rich people had to pay more than the working class.
Danner Morrison/7th Period
ReplyDelete12/9/11
Record High Anti-Incumbent Sentiment Toward Congress
http://www.gallup.com/poll/151433/Record-High-Anti-Incumbent-Sentiment-Toward-Congress.aspx
According to a recently conducted Gallup poll, 76% of registered voters do not express confidence in the viability of congressmen being reelected. Republicans (75%), Independents (82%), and Democrats (68%) have reached the consensus that a majority of Congressmen are unworthy of re-election. There is another trend: 53% of voters would vote to re-elect the representative of their district, versus 39% who would not vote to re-elect their representative. Currently, 43% of registered voters would re-elect President Obama, versus 55% who would not vote to re-elect President Obama, which despite being higher than the re-election rating of Congress, is below the historical threshold of 48%.
These figures demonstrate that, statistically, there is an anti-incumbency sentiment expressed toward Congress; however, voters have more confidence in their personal representatives over the representatives of other districts, which would imply that voters are unhappy over "other peoples'" representatives, and want them to be replace, but seek to re-elect their won representatives. Although one would have to wait until November 6th, 2012, there may be the possibility of a large political shift akin to the one done in 2010, in response to the historically low re-election ratings.
Kabir Kumar-Hardy 7th Period
ReplyDeleteDemocrats Slam Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney for 'Martini Lifestyle' Ahead of Iowa Debate
Devin Dwyer ABC News
12/9/11 http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/democrats-slam-gingrich-romney-for-martini-lifestyle-ahead-of-iowa-debate/
Democrats have launched a new line of attacks aimed at Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney. Democratic strategists claim that the republican party had been divided into the Tea Party and the 'Martini' Party. Supporter of Obama are labeling Gingrich as the “godfather of gridlock” for his role in the government shutdown of 1995. Mitt Romney has come under fire for his continuous flip-flopping over major political issues. Both are criticized for their disregard of the middle class. Gingrich has been particularly singled out for his $60,000 speeches.
I think this a smart strategy for the Democrats. Not only does it paint the Republican front runners in a negative light, but it also creates internal conflict between the Tea Party and the upper-class Republicans. However, the new tactics have not helped in the polls. Romney remains the GOP leader with Gingrich right behind him.
Salomon Ariza/ 7th period
ReplyDeleteGingrich in bull's-eye at GOP showdown
Paul Steinhauser, CNN
December 9, 2011
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/09/politics/gop-debate/index.html
The article talks about the former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich. It talks about how there is going to be a Republican presidential debate this Saturday. There will be six candidates attending it however Gingrich seems to be the target of the other five. The reason why is because he has had rising poll numbers. A couple of months back he was not doing to well but after several excellent debates he brought his umber of supports to increase.
I find it very interesting how politicians aim to attack their rivals rather than focus on themselves. While I do understand that they need to weaken the strongest rival, politicians should work on helping themselves out rather than trying to make others look bad. I am excited about the future elections. I really not in favor of a particular party, but instead I would like an honest president who can have honest goals which he can achieve.
Perla sanchez
ReplyDeletePrd: 7th
12/9/2011why the GOP field is so weak?
By James Carville, CNN contributor
updated 9:53 AM EST, Fri December 9, 2011
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/08/opinion/carville-gop-field/index.html
Krugman pointed out how inept the Republican field is. He explained why the filed is so inept. He talks about how most partisan democrats would concede that 3 moths ago they republicans had a good chance to win the presidency. And the question was “ why does this thing appears to have so much value have so many low bidders? Why did people like Govs. Chris Christie, Mitch Daniels and other all looked at this and decide not to raise their paddles? So he thinks that they were smart enough to see a big flaw in the process And it is this: the majority party that were going to pick their nominee had been overwhelmed by misinformation right wing pandering, that the potential candidates decided they just could not go through with it. We have watch GOP debates where audience members booed gay soldiers and some dying without health insurance, and we have seem many others, tries to explain professor Krugman.
I liked this current events because it gives you a detail of a person that has seen this and knows about thus problem in GOP. I liked how it informs us about the cause of the GOP field being weak.
Colin Schenk 12-9-11
ReplyDelete7th Period
Posted: 5:05 p.m. today
Updated: 7:04 p.m. today
Pressure builds on Perdue from both sides of death row law
http://www.wral.com/news/state/nccapitol/story/10485373/
Gov. Beverly Perdue has less than three weeks to decide whether to uphold or repeal the 2-year-old Racial Justice Act, which allows death row inmates to challenge their sentences by showing proof that racial bias could have played a role in their trial. Many people say the law is too broadly written and will clog the court system for years because over 150 inmates have challenged their sentence. Irving Joyner, a professor at the North Carolina Central University School of Law, said studies show the state's death penalty is racially biased. "I would tell her not to sign the repeal of the Racial Justice Act and allow the court to determine if the capital sentences have been fairly imposed in the past," Joyner said. If she vetoes the repeal, the Racial Justice Act will stand, and GOP leaders don't appear to have enough votes to override her veto.
I feel that repealing the Racial Justice Act would be unfair to the many inmates that will not be able to have their cases looked over. Even if most of the inmates on death row were convicted fairly, the few that were given a heavier sentence because they are a certain race need justice. No one should ever be put to death instead of given life in prison based on their race.
Kiara Luna/ 7th period
ReplyDelete12/9/11
White House rejects Republican payroll tax proposal
http://news.yahoo.com/white-house-rejects-republican-payroll-tax-proposal-192618315.html
The White House rejected Friday the latest proposal from Republicans in Congress on a payroll tax cut. He said that its costs had to be balanced away and not with budget cuts exempting the rich. Republicans have projected that the payroll tax cut be paid for with an expansion of a pay freeze for federal workers changes to civilian federal retiree benefits and other reforms, including gradual increases in Medicare health premiums for the elderly and a clampdown on assistance to illegal immigrants. They have also wanted to tie the payroll tax extension to the approval of TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline. The State Department has postponed a decision on that project until 2013 to give more time to study an alternate route for the pipeline: also to address environmental concerns. Republicans have accused Obama of approaching for that holdup for political reasons to evade upsetting his Democratic base ahead of the November 2012 presidential vote.
I agree with Obama. It doesn’t make sense to me to cut some taxes if that means taking the money to do it from the people. It would more fair if the rich people had to pay more than the working class.