Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO
4 views | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Christopher Barnes
Scoop.it!

BY 11/10 or 11/11 (4 of 4 total)-- How Obama Blew the Entire Last Year (Be sure to include the graphic in your analysis!)

BY 11/10 or 11/11 (4 of 4 total)-- How Obama Blew the Entire Last Year (Be sure to include the graphic in your analysis!) | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
In the 12 months since his reelection, the president has achieved far less than he expected and suffered one mishap after another.
Christopher Barnes's insight:

It is hard not to feel bad for a man this under fire. It has been a tough year to be the President, and many believe Obama hasn't handled controversy too well (including myself).  What has Obama done?  He has almost declared war on a middle eastern regime, completely botched an already detested piece of legislature, and pursued a doomed quest for gun control.  These failures have not gone unnoticed and the President's popularity has taken a tumble.  He has always been controversial but the blunders of the last year have highlited fierce Republican hatred (and that really is how a lot of Republicans feel, they really truly hate this man).  Obamacare already had the commander-in-chief on thin ice, but the failure to execute and get people signed up has proven uforgivable.  The NSA scandle has been another serious black eye, with no credible information on how much exactly we've been monitored by our own government, one that was already being accused of fascism by its inhabitants.  Overrall I would hate to be in Obama's shoes right now, it's a lonely place.

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 3:30 PM

Kind of a biased article. Catalogued how Obama managed to screw up his second term by promising to have more actions and less talk (as they've always done) but he ended up swallowing his words. Wasting huge national sums on....gun control (because a crazy dude killed 20 elementary kids)...really how hard is gun control that you have to spend so much on it. In his second reelection, he stated that he wanted to focus more on immigration laws. Wait, I haven't heard anything significant about such matters. Ah well, I guess he's trying to save the economy. No, not happening either, because he came up with a very smart plan, the National Healthcare (no really, its a very merciful plan but it needs MORE planning yeah?) and that basically screw up another large chunk of dough. Oh boy, I guess he still has his Congress to help him out. NOPE they're full of Republican babies. Then Obama wanted to help out with Syria, asking Putin to withdraw their rejection but Snowden is stuck in Russia, revealing unwanted, embarassing government documents. Obama is at a standstill.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 28, 2014 7:57 PM

This article talks about Obama's struggles as president throughout both terms, and his struggle with dealing with the republicans. At the moment, our presidents approval ratings are at their lowest because it seems as though Obama's getting nothing done in office. 

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 8:09 PM
I think that Obama was not expecting all these setbacks. He set high goals for himself and he was determined to carry them out. Things have not gone as planned for Obama and his polls have gone down. In the video the guy said "the obamacare website is one month old and still like all one month old it is still shitting its pants" so that speaks for itself and how obama is doing.
Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 11/12 or 11/13 -- 1st of 4 -- Snake Handling: Law vs. First Amendment rights

BY 11/12 or 11/13 -- 1st of 4 -- Snake Handling: Law vs. First Amendment rights | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
A LaFollette pastor headed to court next week for having dozens of poisonous snakes at his church said the laws he allegedly violated in Tennessee infringe on his freedom of religion.

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

Okay this is just wacky.  freedom to act on religious beliefs is not always protected, and never protected when a law is being broken.  A guy went out into the woods and caught snakes to pray with.  That is actually crazy and dangerous.  And I think he probably drugged the snakes into being docile because there is no way someone wouldn't get bitten by the third time he did that otherwise.  Have you ever seen a rattlesnake in the wild?  They don't like being disturbed, and if god gets distracted for a second from protecting you from that dangerous animal you are done.  This is unreasonably dangerous, case closed.

 

PS

"snakes got took" is my new favorite phrase.

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 3:54 PM

Religious or not. Law or not. Who cares?! If people's lives are clearly at risk, why are such practices disputable? It's apparent that if people are not professional at handling dangerous animals, do not do so. Period. Why is the government dragged into this? and why is this stupid minister leading a blind crowd?

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 12:55 PM

This article talks about a Pastor who has to go to court because he had poisonous snakes at his church during service; however some may say that this violates one's freedon of practicing religion. In court he justifies his act with the 1st Amendment. 

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 11:18 PM

I think that if you bring a poisonous snake into your church it will probably not help bring people back. So on the pastors part that was just a weird and irrational demonstration that he could have gotten his point across in a different way. Although you do have freedom of expression and speech i do not think that is how it should be used. 

Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 11/12 or 11/13 -- 3rd or 4 -- Pastor loses bus driving job for praying with students

BY 11/12 or 11/13 -- 3rd or 4 -- Pastor loses bus driving job for praying with students | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
A bus driver for the Burnsville school district was fired last week for leading kids in Christian prayers on his bus, even after he was warned to stop — a move he considers a violation of his freedom of speech...

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

George Nathaniel does not understand what first amendment rights entail.  This should be an open and shut argument.  His employer warned him not to pray with the children but George Nathaniel did anyone.  This resulted in his rightful termination, especially considering complaints were lodged.  The children should not have have coerced toward religion, even if Mr. Nathaniel was not a state employee.   He got what he deserved.

more...
Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:36 PM

This article talks about a bus driver who lost his job because, even after a few warnings, he chose to pray to students on his bus. He believes that him getting fired violates the first amndment, right to religion. I can see his point on this, but I feel like if you're doing something like this is public and offending others then youre in face in a sense violating their right to religion, so it's a lose-lose situation, and he was bound to lose his job.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:43 PM

I think that although i am a christian it  can be very uncomfortable when people get a religion forced  on them. Praying on a public school bus can probably be uncomfortable for some kids and although it was in good intentions it is probably not the best. It's good for people to share their religion but on their own time not during school. If it were a private christian school then that would be completely acceptable. 

Ashley O.'s curator insight, March 7, 2014 9:45 PM

That is unfair, he has every right to express his faith, just like those who are not religious and express their personal views. 

Scooped by Christopher Barnes
Scoop.it!

BY 11/10 or 11/11 (3 or 4 total) -- Video: 'This Week': Rick Perry in Iowa

ABC's Jeff Zeleny goes one-on-one with Gov. Rick Perry on his first trip to Iowa since 2012.
Christopher Barnes's insight:

Governer Rick Perry is saying all of the right things (for a change) and obviously gearing up for a run at the white house.  Not antagonizing Chris Christie is a good tactic that is a reversal on the last election's bloodbath within the Republican primaries.  The question seemed to be if the Republican candidates were "Republican enough" in 2012.  Rick Perry is taking the focus off of competition within his party and focusing on what he wants to change about (Obama's) America.  The touch of grey and unnecessary glasses speak his true message loud and clear,"I'm running for President, but this time will be different."  Recovering from the "Strong" advertisement and the debate blunder will be difficult, but he's doing all of the right things.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:33 PM

This video is a discussion with Rick Perry, talking about issues like Obamacare. He is very bold and is not very afraid to say that he is against the act. He obviously is unhappy with the current situation in the White House, and wants to make a change in 2016 by running for the presidency himself. I am interested to see how the 2016 election turns out for him.

Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 3:50 PM

With one year left in office, Perry is planning on running for the 2016 Election as is predicted in his trip to Iowa.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 28, 2014 8:28 PM

This video talks about Rick Perry and his plans to run for president in 2016, Perry discusses his views on Ted Cruz and his agreements/disagreements with this tactics. He also says that Christie may not be a true conservative.

Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 11/14 or 11/15 (3 of 3) -- Democrats Threaten to Abandon Obama on Health Law Provision

BY 11/14 or 11/15 (3 of 3) -- Democrats Threaten to Abandon Obama on Health Law Provision | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Congressional Democrats are increasingly expressing support for allowing Americans to retain the insurance coverage they are losing because of the Affordable Care Act.

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

     To no one's surprise the Democrats that supported the Affordable Care Act have gotten cold feet as constituents have voiced displeasure at the less-than-stellar rollout.  The Obamacare website has been a disaster and people are not able to keep their plans as promised but it would set a strange president for future legislature if Obama's bill is gutted in Congress after being passed not even a full term ago.  If I were a Democrat I would be very scared, as this failed rollout is shaping up to be the Liberal version of the backlash to the Republican-caused government shutddown.

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:33 PM

Enrollment is low for the Affordable Healthcare and Demos are planning to ditch Obama. His top aides suggested cancellation but maybe Obama is saving face, he doesn't think the plan will dry up...oh but it might just will.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:53 PM

This article talks about how Obamacare is doing lots of things it said it wouldn't, like getting rid of American's insurance coverage when the president said they would keep it. Democrats and republican's are agreeing with each other on not making american's keep the obamacare.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 10:30 PM
This article talks about how some democrats have been threatening to abandon Obama on Health Law Provision. It says that the Democrats in congress have been more supportive of the idea that Americans should be allowed to keep the insurance coverage they are losing because of the Affordable Care Act after Obama already stated that they could keep their existing insurance. Obama is just digging himself a deeper hole.
Scooped by Christopher Barnes
Scoop.it!

BY 11/3 -- Booker Brings Dash Of Diversity To Still Old, White Senate -- Demographics of Current Congress

BY 11/3 -- Booker Brings Dash Of Diversity To Still Old, White Senate -- Demographics of Current Congress | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Cory Booker becomes ninth African-American to serve in the Senate, replacing Frank Lautenberg.
Christopher Barnes's insight:

     The article contextualizes the Senatorship of new Senator Cory Booker.  As the article pours on the statistics things appear more and more grim for minorities within Congress.  Even though Congress is becoming more diverse, the lack of racial diversity is disturbing.  Four black Senators have been elected in the history of the Senate.  Four! You could count them on one hand!  And two of them were elected in the last ten years, meaning before 2004 only two black Senators had ever been elected.  It hurts my heart that I suspect this is because of prejudice within the majority of voters (old white people) and hurtful social stigmas against minorities in politics.  I don't care if it is getting better, it is bad.  It is impossible to act like this country represents black people fairly or even adequately when the Senate's longest tenured member was a racist and segregationist, and there have been a total of nine black senators.  Yes, minority representatives are necessary for adequate representation of minorities, especially in a country with so many.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:30 PM

The electio of Senator Cory Booker will add some diversity to the Senate because he is a a relatively young African American. Most of the Senate consists of old white people. This trend is starting to change a little, especially the Democratic side. A more diverse Congress will be able to better address the concerns of different groups of people.This is reflecting the nation a little bit more, the diversity of this nation.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 28, 2014 4:07 PM

This article talks about the young and new african-american senator and the diversity in the senate. With our country being as diverse as it is, so should our government. That would lead to a better represented population.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 8:05 PM
I think it is good for congress e to be diverse and have different ethinicities, different genders, different ages, and different parties. When passing bills and making decisions you will get a diverse group of opinions making it better for the people
Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 11/3 -- Secession Movement

BY 11/3 -- Secession Movement | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Residents of rural areas feel shut out of their states' politics, so why not create their own?

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

     The article presents the very old issue of secession within the United States, inspired by a familiar catalyst: people don't like being told what to do.  Conservatives in blue states are the most vocal supporters of secession, mostly because their political views are not being reflected by their state legislature.  My opinion is this: too bad.  Conservatives come off as whiny and irrational (impossible, I know) when they are willing to secede just to gain more representation or not follow a state law.  There are plenty of laws I don't agree with in my state, but you don't see me passing out buttons for Rick Perry's secession movement.  Sometimes you are the minority, deal with it; changing the landscape of American politics to eliminate malaprotionmant in northeast colorado is not the most responsible option.

more...
Melissa Aleman's curator insight, December 20, 2013 3:12 PM

This article talks about citizens, counties, and groups in general in certain states claiming that they want to secede from their state and make a new one. The main group that seems to have a problem is the Republicans living in a Democratic region. For example in Colorado, a vote is going tobe held for secession. I  think that if people have problems with beliefs and the way things work in a certain state, that they should leave. You cant change the whole state to meet all of your standards.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 28, 2014 3:29 PM

The article says that many counties's rural residents  are feeling the need secede and create a new state. Northern counties want to create their own state because they don't agree with the rest of colorado. While the creation of a new state seems a bit extreme, I feel like these residents need to be better represented to avoid ideas like secession. 

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 8:00 PM
I think this is simple if you don't like where you live move. It would be completely outrageous to secede and create another state let alone new gvt. The economy would fail and it would be a mess.
Scooped by Christopher Barnes
Scoop.it!

BY 10/20 -- Jim DeMint: We Won't Back Down on ObamaCare

BY 10/20 -- Jim DeMint: We Won't Back Down on ObamaCare | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
In The Wall Street Journal, president of the Heritage Foundation Jim DeMint writes that fighting a law that is unfair, unworkable and unaffordable is reasonable and necessary.
Christopher Barnes's insight:

  Jim DeMint does not like Obamacare.  In fact, one might say that Jim DeMint is very dissaproving of (and biased against) Obama himself.  This is Evident when Mr.DeMint explains why he hates universal healthcare (and trust me, Jim DeMint hates all universal healthcare, that much is explained in his article when he generalizes that universal healthcare will automatically be poor) and goes on to defend the government shutdown and the valiant Sen. Cruz.  I personally do not wear such rosey glasses when casting my gaze upon a government THAT DOES NOT WORK.  The government shut down.  That's not supposed to happen.  I might not have a degree in political science (yet) but last time I checked,  when the government is being held ransom by a small group extremists we send seal team six in to assasinate them.  In Mr.DeMints' case the leader of these extremists is holding off the spectre of higher premiums, and less importantly apparently, health coverage for more than just the people that have 401k's.  And for that, Ted Cruz, DeMint thanks you.  Making DeMint the only person in the last two weeks to thank Ted Cruz for anything, unfortunately of Cruz this could be a long next five years if he doesn't kiss and make up with the majority of his party.

more...
Sachi Kamble's curator insight, October 24, 2013 1:59 AM

Demint is obviously biased because he is the president of the leading conservative think tank in America. He claims that he has met people who complained that their converages have been renounced, their work hours cut and their jobs eliminated, but he doesn't have any direct quotes from these people, so it's all just paraphrased. The premiums have increased in 45 states. Young adult's premiums will be a lot higher than those of elderly, which will be hard on us since the baby boomers are all retiring now. The author claims that the only way Obamacare will lead to single-payer health-care system is by employers droping health-care for their low-wage workers. He also claims that health care will deteriorate in America as access to doctors will decrease. 

Tianna Kelly's curator insight, October 24, 2013 5:58 PM

Jim Dewint is  republican who believed that the recent government shutdown was both necessary and proper. According to him, it was the only option in fighting against an unfair law. However, he does not mention the effect of the shutdown- the government services that went to a halt, the workers who went unpaid, and those citizens adversely affected. In my opinion, DeWint, and those like him, make America the laughingstock of the global community. 

Chris Buenaseda's curator insight, November 4, 2013 5:50 PM

President of the Heritage Foundation Jim Demint states that he and many others are not stopping until they have gotten rid of Obamacare. Some main points against Obamacare is that it causes employment issues and citizens can not, financially, withstand the pressure that comes with the arrival of the ACA. While this guy tries to fight against a cause that no one has succeeded in passing for almost 50 years, Obamacare is still alive. Has he done his job in stopping Obamacare.

 

No. Obamacare is still up and running. 40+ times has it been challenged and 40+ times has it succeeded in staying alive and constitutional. Maybe they should stop trying. "Three times, the charm" is the phrase, not "40+ times, the charm."

Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

Nightly News: Gerrymandering: the recipe for dysfunctional government?

Nightly News: Gerrymandering: the recipe for dysfunctional government? | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Video on msnbc.com: The age-old practice of politicians re-drawing Congressional districts to find friendly voters, or, gerrymandering, has allowed members of the House of Representatives from both sides of the aisle to stay in power regardless of...

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

American politics have been no stranger to questionable morals, but in the last decade this seems to have accelerated the decay of fairness in elections.  Certain Texas Congressmen took gerrymandering to a new level by redistricting ambitiously in 2003.  Super-PACs and similar wanton funding for politicians have become mainstream and accepted within American politics.  Am I missing something here?  Politicians are murdering democracy by limiting Congress turnover and eliminating voter choice.  Homogeny is the ally of the politician, diversity is scary to the Congressman, regardless of party.  I feel like I should expect more of our leaders than cheating.

more...
Mason Paul Lyman's curator insight, April 2, 2014 9:41 PM

1. The House redraws the congressional districts every 10 years on the census in an attempr to make the districts lend their support to whoever the current party majority is.

2. Gerrymandering allows incumbents to get reelected multiple times. 

3. Have a computerized, neutral program that would create districts based on geography and demography. A program such as this would make it more difficult for incumbents to get reelected.

4. Yes, there are. One party could earn more votes than another but still lose the election.

5. No because it is an unhonorable way to earn the respective benefits.

Jessica Markle's curator insight, April 12, 2014 2:09 PM

gerymandering is the act of redrawing a district and its has gotten its name from Albridge Garry who redrew a district in the beginning of our country in order for him to win a vote. The redrawing of the districts almost guarantees a win in voting because it allows the politicians to choose their voters. In the video, suggested possible solutions to gerrymandering would be to redraw district lines according to geography, demographics, and population density but it would cause a disruption in the current system and would make it very difficult for a representative to be reelected to a district that doesn't have the same advantages. Gerrymandering can be compared to the electoral college because these systems don't work in the favor of the public, or the majority vote because with the representatives picking the districts containing people they know will vote for them along with the electoral college being able to override the public vote, it has caused question in the democratic system of the United States.

Lauren Sargent's curator insight, April 17, 2014 9:47 PM

The term gerrymandering comes from an 1810 law that was created by Elbridge Gerry, Governor of Massachusetts, which repositioned and defined congressional districts based on population changes. After the law was passed, newspaper articles came out with pictures of the re-drawn districts in concerning shapes, such as a salamander. They linked the two words “salamander” and “Gerry” and called it gerrymandering. As time has gone on, gerrymandering has been manipulated by both the Republican and Democratic parties by them re-drawing districts specifically to change the possible outcome of their “political cartoon” if you will. House seats are being re-apportioned every presidential election year. The video suggested that these means of politics have made it so that “the politicians are choosing their voters, rather than the voters choosing their politicians”. This is causing major distrust in candidates and decrease in voter participation. Gerrymandering has been beneficial to incumbents because they change their districts to work in favor of their election. Both the Electoral College and gerrymandering can be seen as unfair or corrupt government practices because they can sometimes both not accurately depict the peoples' votes by changing their districts. With the Electoral College, they could win a majority of the electoral votes, but not the majority vote. With gerrymandering, a politician would be elected just because of the re-drawn, manipulated districts, which is ridiculous. 

Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

Kate Snow’s full interview with CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin - Video on NBCNews.com

Kate Snow’s full interview with CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin - Video on NBCNews.com | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Video on msnbc.com: NBC’s Kate Snow spoke with CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin  about the debt ceiling and what happens if Congress fails to raise that limit so the government can borrow more money to pay its bills...

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

Many have been talking about the looming American default (and isn't looming such a good word to describe it?) and it's possible effects but I have not yet heard an analysis of the actual consequences.  Mr.Sorkin goes in depth as to the effects of America defaulting on it's debts as a result of apparent gridlock and incompetence within Congress and those responisble for the lack of a national budget.  Sorkin describes a financial burden as a result of increased interest rates on loans to pay our debtors back. "Your United States economy, folks!".  Overall it is apparent that defaulting is not favorable.  And unfortunately, not unlikely.

more...
Tianna Kelly's curator insight, December 1, 2013 9:30 PM

I am honestly befuddled by this entire predicament. Even after gathering an understanding of the debt ceiling and its impending deadline, I fail to understand why our country's elected officials, this country's highest legal authority, cannot come together and do what is best for those they represent, those who gave them their seats. 

Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 7:21 PM

It seems that America has very little options, with all of them most likel going to spiral downhill. One question I would like answered is what does the government need to do to get to a point where it doesn't need to borrow money? I think that paying foreign nations back in small amounts would be best; borrowing more and raising the debt ceiling is what placed the goverment in this situation anyway. There are many other ways but I think that that would be the best way.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 18, 2014 12:43 PM

If we do not raise the debt ceiling, American citizens will experience an extreme loss of goods and services provided by the federal government. Then the government would have to decide if they want to pay back foriegn debtors (like China) and let Americans suffer, or supply goods and services to Americans and let the debt to countries increase until we do not have money yet. The states may have to step up and provide the services that the federal government can't.

Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from Politics From My Point Of View
Scoop.it!

Daily Kos | "Poll: Shutting down government over Obamacare really, really unpopular" | 09/23/13

Daily Kos | "Poll: Shutting down government over Obamacare really, really unpopular" | 09/23/13 | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Once again, the American people have spoken. Defunding Obamacare is not what they want. But even the minority who does want it think shutting down government or defaulting on the national debt to ...

Via Franklin Delano Williams
Christopher Barnes's insight:

     The article cites a poll taken of American citizen's views on whether or not to raise the debt ceiling as a response to "Obamacare".  The poll showed that the majority of Americans opposed defaulting on the debt, but opposition to "Obamacare" itself was more popular.  The only group favoring defaulting is the teaparty.  The implication in the article is that teaparty members are dogmatic and blindly in opposition to socialized healthcare.  The treatment of the party is less than fair, with members being reffered to as "teabaggers".  Personally, I do not agree with a government shutdown, but teaparty members' beliefs should not be discounted as irrational just because they are extreme.  The persistence of the proponenets of a shutdown is startling, and just about sums up American politics in the last five years: one side will be out of a job before they compromise.

more...
Franklin Delano Williams's curator insight, September 23, 2013 11:14 PM

HELLO Ted Cruz! Can You Hear Us NOW!!

Scooped by Christopher Barnes
Scoop.it!

Video: Denis McDonough: 'Outraged' at Ted Cruz's Al Qaeda comments

Video: Denis McDonough: 'Outraged' at Ted Cruz's Al Qaeda comments | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Denis McDonough, in an interview on ABC's 'This Week' said he was 'outraged' at Ted Cruz's comments that our forces would be serving as 'Al Qaeda's air force.' The interview was immediately followed by one with Sen.
Christopher Barnes's insight:

In my opinion the oversimplification that America would serve as "Al-Queadas airforce" is a worthy point.  The fact is that America is aiding rebels, not much different from those our military has engaged recently.

more...
Sammy Masri's curator insight, September 17, 2013 12:25 AM

30 seconds of generalized response isn't much to go on, and McDonough's statement showed it. Rather than namby-pamby about the issue, everyone needs to grab their fears by the horns are realize: "Yes, we will possibly be helping some groups that are maybe connected to Al-Qaeda. But in the meantime, we can help a whole country of civilians, who, when pressed, will vote for the more reasonable members of the rebels, IF the US helps in time."

 

No more of this "small, calculated, concise" strike nonsense.

Tianna Kelly's curator insight, December 1, 2013 9:02 PM

My initial reacton to Senator Cruz's was similar to McDonough's; Cruz's statement was clearly crafted to be sensational and make headlines. Although I am not a fan of potential United States military action in Syria, Cruz's comments were purposefully disrespectful and, as McDonough iterated, "outrageous".

Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 7:35 PM

It seems very normal and typical for hte Chief of Staff to assure the public that there will be no boots on the ground, but I believe that no amount of assurance that this will be no Libya or Afghanistan, will persuade the American public to join this war.

Scooped by Christopher Barnes
Scoop.it!

BY 11/10 or 11/11 (2 or 4 total) -- Video: 'This Week': Twitter Transforms Politics

The roundtable debates the role of social media in politics following Twitter's IPO.
Christopher Barnes's insight:

Like any other medium with millions of participants, politicians are jumping all over twitter. The name of the game is being known and being supported, and Twitter allows elected officials a new way to interface with constituents.  Any way to get more votes.  Twitter is a valuable tool for guaging the responses of voters, Americans, and people from all over the world.  Thankfully, officials are catching on to the new ways and making it work for them.  Adapt or die.

more...
Maddie Callen's curator insight, December 20, 2013 11:39 AM

twitter has greatly changed politics for better or for worse. consituents can communicate with representatives even easier. some politicans are thought more of as celebrities now especially during election time when they will be on the cover of magaizines and on tabloids. politicains can sometimes seem unproffesional on twitter using slang and abreviations but i think they should try to sound more proper.

Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 3:39 PM

Almost 100% of politicians are involved in the practice of twittering. It's another way to rant, complain and tattle tale through personal media. There's no way for policies to restrain politicians from interracting with the public through media. Politics can now reach out to the lazy, young generations and plus they can control the news they want to put out individually.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 28, 2014 10:06 PM

This video talks about how twitter is changin politics and the information communicated through it, using twitter makes it that much faster and easier to get information out there. Twitter has such a large ammount of users interested in politics, that it made sense for politians to create accounts. It's cool seeing politians, old and young, adapt to these new trends!

Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 11/12 or 11/13 -- 4th or 4 -- Texas and 5 Other States Resist Processing Benefits for Gay Couples

BY 11/12 or 11/13 -- 4th or 4 -- Texas and 5 Other States Resist Processing Benefits for Gay Couples | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Some states are citing a conflict with state laws to defy the defense secretary’s order that gay spouses of National Guard members be given the same federal marriage benefits as heterosexual spouses.

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

Federalism is at work, and like any other issue in America, plenty of people are unhappy about it.  Same sex couples must go to Federal military installations to receive spousal benefits in some states that do not allow gay marriage.  Some are saying this is discriminatory and degrading.  I say that if the policy is still enforced, nothing is wrong.  The policy should be enforced, and it seems like a fair enough one to me, but if states that don't allow gay marriage want marriage benefits to fall under federal control that is their perogative.  The states shouldn't have to comply to an order that goes against their self-determined rights and laws.

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:12 PM

Some States deny the confirming of marriage benefits for homosexual couples. Personally, I find this a little funny, because the article notes that these States want to "uphold their integrity". Uhm, what sort of integrity? That homosexual marriages are not....marriages- that is, believed by the people and conservative state legislators? I can't figure out this lame excuse of "integrity", because really, refusing to accept other people's decisions are no sort of integrity. (Feeling neutral about gay marriages does not mean I fervently support it).

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 1:09 PM

This article talks about Texas and other states refusing giving the same marriage benefits to gay couples as man/woman couples in the national guard. Defense Secretary Hagel had ordered that gay spouses of the National guard be given the same rights, but Texas and others aren't budging. 

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:58 PM

I think that gay people should have the same rights as other marriages. I think that especially same sex military couples should get the same benefits as everyone else. It doesn't affect anyone but them so it is obnoxious and annoying not to give it to them. Yes the states that are resisting to give the gay couples the benefits are very conservative it does not mean that we should not give everyone the same military couple benefits no matter who they are it is there right they risk there lives to serve our country and can't get couple benefits all because they are gay. That is absurd and ridiculous. 

Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 11/14 or 11/15 (1 of 3) -- Administration: 106,000 enrolled in health insurance in first month of HealthCare.gov

BY 11/14 or 11/15 (1 of 3) -- Administration: 106,000 enrolled in health insurance in first month of HealthCare.gov | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Of the 106,000 enrollees, only about 27,000 were able to sign up through the federal health-insurance site.

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

I recognize that it is early in the implementation of Obamacare.  I realize policies can take years to work correctly.  But let's face it, Obama has not done a fantastic job.  Beyond a website almost single-handedly derailing a law that managed to make it past Congress, no one is enrolling in Obama's insurance markets.  The public response to the prospect of Obamacare was fierce, but the outcry against the reality is deafening.  Let's face it, the President messed up.  And let's move on.  Repealing it would be my favorite course of action, but the white house could at least do this efficiently.

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:22 PM

The figures are not up to what was predicted because the people lose trust in such a brittle plan. Its new, disorganized and made with haste, those who signed up stopped midway because they were informed of its problems or because they thought about how the elites' not getting proper pay might trickle down to their jobs.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:26 PM

This article talks about the 106,000 people that enrolled inObama's health insurance in just the first month. That number was way lower than the predictions they had made. It also talks about attempts to pass laws that allow people to keep their old health polices. Its honestly not that shocking that people wouldn't jump to join the new healthcare plan.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 10:22 PM
I think that obviously Obama and his administration had i hopes and expectations for the health care and it was not as successful as they would have liked it to be in the beginning. I think that the website having difficulties and congress not complying is making it a lot harder and not going over as smoothly as planned.
Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 11/14 or 11/15 (2 of 3) -- Your Obamacare questions, answered

BY 11/14 or 11/15 (2 of 3) -- Your Obamacare questions, answered | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Still left wondering about Obamacare? Wonkblog’s Sarah Kliff and PostTV’s “In Play” have the Kliff Notes version for you.

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

     The Obamacare system mystifies me endlessly.  Obama's plan is dependent on young people entering the new insurance marketplace, bringing down premiums.  The only way these young people will access the new marketplaces is if their state does not expand Medicaid.  Limiting Medicaid is a central piece of State-level Republican politics, meaning that Obama's main source of precious premium lowering young adults will be from Republican controlled states.  Not necessarily a criticism, but a worthy observation.  The move will also drive up insurance premiums for the wealthy, who are covered by another government agency: Medicare.

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:29 PM

So requirements for obtaining Obamacare is basically asking us to be a bit...poor? Having national healthcare is the same as not having one because only the basics are paid. Honestly, my insurance company can do just about the same thing and I don't mind the bills if they can cover for EVERYBODY part I injured.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:43 PM

This article talks about Obama Care and how everyone will have to have health insurce eventually. It also talks about how Insurance companies cannot deny anyone from buying their healthcare because of pre-existing conditions. This could be beneficial  because there's many sick people who cannot afford heath care when they really need it, and no one will get screwed over.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 10:44 PM
This article includes FAQs concerning ObamaCare. All the questions asked and answered include a quick explanation of ObamaCare, all the existing insurance difficulties, process of enrollment and the legality of remaining without health insurance. The health cares lunch was very big and messy for Obama so it is interesting that it has taken this long for an article like this to come out.
Scooped by Christopher Barnes
Scoop.it!

BY 11/3 -- Tale Of The Tape: Comparing The Budget Committee Heads

BY 11/3 -- Tale Of The Tape: Comparing The Budget Committee Heads | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray are likely to at least set a friendly tone during budget talks.
Christopher Barnes's insight:

     Paul Ryan's position has changed radically over the last few months.  Coming off of a failed vice-presidential campaign Ryan was looking like one of the most dangerous (in a good way) Republicans in the legislative branch.  As head of the congressional budget committee he had already made landmark progress at slashing undesirable portions of the budget.  The sequester especially appeared to be a victory for Ryan.  Recently though, Ryan's control of the budget has put him on the defense now, as the inability to pass a continuing resolution caused a government shutdown.  Now conservatives' are being questioned about their mammoth cuts to public assistance programs.  The democrats now have the upper hand in creating a budget, a scary prospect for those that will be paying taxes for the next ten years.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:25 PM

This article compares the leaders of the House and Senate Buget Committees. It is very good to know that two people who disagree about policy issues can still get along; which is very difficult to find nowadays. In Congress nowadays, this seems to be very rare. However, this does not mean it will be easy to compromise about the budget since the two parties they represent might not be willing. Many members of Congress should look at their example and learn from it.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 28, 2014 3:36 PM

This article talks about Paul Ryan and Patty Murray's  different approaches of handling the budget issue. They both each have their own style which approaching the decisions, and different plans as to how to solve the issue.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 11:42 PM

Both Paul Ryan and Patty Murray are extremely different I think it should be interesting to see how they will work together it says they both come from similar backgrounds. When Paul was 16 his father passed away and when Murray was in her teens her dad developed an illness and her mom found a job and they lived off of welfare so they are both raised with common backgrounds but their ideologies now are extremely different so it should be interesting to see how they work together. 

Scooped by Christopher Barnes
Scoop.it!

BY 11/3 -- Is email ever private? Take a tour of the path traveled by your email

BY 11/3 -- Is email ever private? Take a tour of the path traveled by your email | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Video on msnbc.com: Critical questions are being raised about data safety in light of hacking reports and news about NSA data collection. NBC’s Stephanie Gosk explains what happens after you hit ‘send’ on an email message.
Christopher Barnes's insight:

     This video clip is the scariest thing I have seen all day.  When I learned that everything I had done on the internet was closely documented by a government agency with apparently no limits to violation of privacy, I became concerned.  When I learned that multiple US presidents had approved of and utilized this agency, I felt like I was living in the prequel to "1984".  All of that was fine though, before I realized that everything anyone in the US has done on a computer is just sitting in a warehouse somewhere in Eurasia.  Now I'm not just crazy for my distrust of our fascistic government, I'm downright justified.  I feel like this stuff is why the once popular series "24" lost viewers in the last couple of seasons, no one wants to watch Jack Bauer spy on housewives googling gespacho recipes.  Even less people want to watch the hero hand those files over to an oversees shipping freighter to be transported to storage.  Don't do it, Jack!

more...
Melissa Aleman's curator insight, December 20, 2013 3:07 PM

This video enlightens us in depth of the workings of email and how it is possible for others to view and who could possibly be watching where it goes. Suprisingly the data doesnt stay in the states but actually travels over seas. This video just re stated all that we know and gave more detail about the whole situation.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 25, 2014 6:43 PM

This video shows us that it true when they say anything you put on the internet will be there forever, and many of us blow that off. I feel that we all need to be a little more mindful of what we say and do online, and we should keep a lot more private.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 11:53 PM

Lately there has been a lot of controversy over the government reading peoples phone txts emails social media phone calls ect. I think that the people have the right to privacy as stated in the constitution. 

Scooped by Christopher Barnes
Scoop.it!

BY 10/22 or 10/23 -- 1-800-ObamaCare-Denial: Website problems don't matter when your intentions are good.

BY 10/22 or 10/23 -- 1-800-ObamaCare-Denial: Website problems don't matter when your intentions are good. | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
The Wall Street Journal on the liberal claim that website problems don't matter when your intentions are good.
Christopher Barnes's insight:

The article is largely critical not only of "Obamacare" and it's basis but also it's execution.  The main subject was mostly how the innefectiveness of healthcare.gov reflected on the ineptitude of Obama.  Personally, I'm tired of the opposition to "Obamacare" on the grounds that it will be badly executed, Obama has made it clear that he will pour any amount of money into this program to make it work.  If the website does not work now it will work later.  Issues like this are not surprising, when the government uses the internet it has a tendency to backfire.  It does not help that the people that drew up the bill and it's execution plan have no clue how to skype.  The bill is not perfect.  That does not mean that those opposing the bill have to make an issue of every failure.  I'm tired of hearing about it.  Now that it's a dangerous PR situation Obama will surely have the issue taken care of, another tendency of this administration.

more...
Rabika Rehman's curator insight, October 24, 2013 10:37 PM

Obama thinks that the afordable care act is more than just a website.This reform is upsetting insurance company,they are already making changes with their individual policies because they are non-complaint with the obama care. The fact that it's more than a website should scare people.

Maddy Folkerts's curator insight, October 25, 2013 9:21 PM

I don't agree with this article that the website problems means all of ObamaCare will be a failure. It's more of a technical issue than an issue with the whole plan of the policy. This article was extremely biased and touched on irrelevant problems rather than arguing the actual important, debatable topics.

Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 7:47 PM

Obama encourages people to apply for benefits over phone. The article itself is very discriminating and has a very derogetory tone. ObamaCare's real goal is to focus over health care. The disadvantage of ObamaCare is that the enrolled people will mainly be the most expensive patients. Even in the video, obama says that the website is slow and there are problems, but the intentions are good. Some people are going to be paying higher prices than they usually do.

Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 10/20 -- What Obama and the tea party have in common

BY 10/20 -- What Obama and the tea party have in common | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
They both disdain governing the way Madison intended.

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

  In the articel George F. Will accuses both segments of the federal government of not being madisonian, or, less pretentiously, not compromising enough.  I personally would agree at first hearing this claim, but personally believe the authors point to be null as after reading his reasoning.  Obama is accused, in the article, of wanting "elegeant bills" that do not involve compromise or politics.  So is the extreme right in America.  But as the aritcle continues it becomes apparent that Obama's disdain for overly-convoluted and compromising government is not eh same as the right's hatred of big government.  It is mad apparent that Obama wants to win.  Obama wants to win healthcare from the republicans, Obama wants his bill to go through untouched.  Republicans do not want to be monitored or controlled any more than they already are.  Not to excuse the not-so-new dogmatism in the republican party.  In my opinion this means Obama wants a more efficient, less partisan government, while Congress and most republicans literally want less government.  As in they wish to be governed less.  Obama wants to govern everyone MORE (once again in my opinion) and do it without compromising to the admittedly infuriating republican majority in Congress or it's ranking members.  He wants to do this by compromising less, which is what the author states, but not because he has anything in common with the tea-party.

more...
Chris Buenaseda's curator insight, November 4, 2013 7:10 PM

Both are similar in that they are really hard to compromise with. The framers of the government have aimed for the structure of the govt. to balnce out the power. I don't see any similarities between the two other than their characteristics when it comes to compromise.

Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 6:26 PM

I strongly agree  that politicians these days are so blinded by their parties' goals that they are unable to make necessary compromises that are better for the country. I like the way that the writer compares the Tea Party with Obama. He also says that because of this unwillingness to compromise, Obama has too much power.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 18, 2014 5:02 PM

The article says that both Obama and the Tea Party don't want to go through the process of compromising that Madison had planned out. They're both impatient and arent willing to work together. I think an issue like this should be compromised, They need to come up with a solution together and figure out what to do. Obama does want the legislative branch to touch Obamacare. In my opinion, thats not very democratic or fair. The legislative branch represents the US citizens. we elect representatives in the legislative branch so we can have a voice. With Obama saying he doesn''t want congess to touch it seems like he doesn't really care about our opinion.

Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

House Democrats sign discharge petition - Ginger Gibson

House Democrats sign discharge petition - Ginger Gibson | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
When Democrats announced on the fourth day of the shutdown they were going to start a discharge petition to force a vote on a clean continuing resolution to open the government, it appeared like a long shot.

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

The elusive discharge petition is being touted by the Democratic minority in face of a very unpopular government shutdown.  It reflects poorly on Congress when the GOVERNMENT SHUTS DOWN because no one can agree on a budget.  They pass continuing resolutions in Congress frequently but the frustratingly stubborn Republican majority is unwilling to compromise it seems.  This incredibly conservative and dogmatic breed of far-right republican is the main reason the government id dhut down at this point.  Democrats are dusting off a long shot strategy just so that they can do their jobs.  The whole scenario is absurd and embarassing.

more...
Katherine Banks's curator insight, October 15, 2013 10:56 PM

@APGOPO this article explains exactly how hard a time the deocrates are having trying to get the gov. reopened. even if the "entire" democratic party signed the discharge petition they will still need 18 republicains and will have to wait 30 hours. they already have not been allowed to vote until saturday and the speaker boehner who is a republican will  not let them bring it to the floor until they get 218 signnatures which is easier said than done.

Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from Obamacare
Scoop.it!

Lower Health Insurance Premiums to Come at Cost of Fewer Choices

Lower Health Insurance Premiums to Come at Cost of Fewer Choices | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it

With insurance marketplaces set to open next month under the new health care law, consumers may find that insurers have put big limits on their choices.


Via Sean Brownson
Christopher Barnes's insight:

As the opponents of such a bill have warned for years "Obamacare" will limit patient's choices when it comes to special prodecures and providers.  The implimentation of the bill is drawing closer, and it is becoming apparent that choices will be scarce.  The terms most often used are that choices are "tight" or "narrow".  Obamacare's lowered premiums will most likely increase total number of patients served, but it is obvious that providers will be restricting the care provided.  Special procedures are going to be rare under a bill that is taking money out of the medical industry.  Only certain hospitals will be covered as well.  This is no real surprise but it is a startling precedent and further confirmation of republican's accusations about the new legislation.

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

Sen. Ted Cruz: I Don't Think President Obama 'Has the Authority' to Order Syria Strike Without Congressional Approval

Sen. Ted Cruz: I Don't Think President Obama 'Has the Authority' to Order Syria Strike Without Congressional Approval | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Contradicting President Obama’s assertion, Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas said this morning on “This Week” that the president does not have the authority to order a military strike on Syria without Congressional approval.

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

Surprise!  A member of congress is against giving the president power.  Mr.Cruz is obviously biased due to his position on the subject of intervention and his occupational position when he says that the president has no right to intervene.  The opposition is less in the party's policy and more in the president's abilities.

more...
Sammy Masri's curator insight, September 17, 2013 12:19 AM

Cruz spoke very well for the majority of the speech: he made a reasonable case about why an attack would not work. But he faltered on two points. One: The state of Texas, vast as though it may be, does not represent the United States. Two: It's almost become customary of Republicans to bring up Benghazi whenever possible. It happened, nothing short of a full-scale operation and the ability to see the future could have prevented it, let the American dead rest in peace.

 

Also, the longer you show the US not supporting innocent civilians, the more and more radical these "Islamic terrorists" will become. Cut to the chase - or in this case, a missile strike - and nip the thing in the bud before it grows too big.

Rachel Murphy's curator insight, October 2, 2013 8:20 PM

Cruz makes it clear that he does not approve of military action in Syria. He believes a strike would aid rebel forces with links to Al-Qaeda. The strike may weaken Assad, but it would only give rebel forces an opportunity to swoop in. His precautions with the attack are plausible. I like the point he made about how OUR US military is not Al-Qaeda's air force. They are here to defend the United States.

Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 6:16 PM

This video shows how complicated this whole situation is, and I had no idea how opposed the public was to involvment in Syria. Is there is a way to reprimand him without a strike? War crimes need to be reprimanded, but does this mean we have to go to war? I was all for involvment, but now I'm really questioning whether that would be the right thing to do.

Rescooped by Christopher Barnes from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

3: Roundtable: Crucial week for Obama - Video on NBCNews.com

3: Roundtable: Crucial week for Obama - Video on NBCNews.com | Chris Barnes' BHS GOPO | Scoop.it
Video on msnbc.com: A Meet the Press roundtable forecasts the pressure on this upcoming week for the president to make his case for intervention in the Syrian conflict.

Via Teresa Herrin
Christopher Barnes's insight:

It is not yet clear if the failure to act promptly will be a blessing or a curse when it comes to Syria, but only time will tell.  I am not the firmest believer in congress' ability to do things efficiently, but it is heartening to see Obama putting the choice in front of us after the oft publicized NSA scandal.  Presently I believe the president is walking a thin line when it comes to Syria.

more...
Melissa Aleman's curator insight, September 11, 2013 10:36 PM

Really enjoyed this video in the sense that it gave me more insight to what's going on and different points of view. Several points like the fact that innocent civilians will die on our watch because of the airstrike was one i especially liked because it made me think more deeply into why we shouldnt intervene. It's clear that this is a huge predicament that even the Round table finds difficult to choose a side in the sense that as a nation we are stuck on deciding whether to be or not to be the "world's policemen."

Daniel Guo's curator insight, September 11, 2013 11:49 PM

I think that Newt Gingrich brings up good points about why it's hard for the public to support an airstrike on Syria. I think that this dicussion is a fair representation of the current public opinion on the matter- nobody wants to directly support a strike; there is no clear right answer.

Rachel Murphy's curator insight, October 2, 2013 8:13 PM

All of the politicians here are hesitant about military strikes in Syria. because they aren't sure about the effect that it would cause. Newt Gingrich makes some excellent points about the importance of communication. I believe some action needs to be taken in Syria, but a strike would only unleash more problems for us. Syria's allies are too powerful.