current events
13 views | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Hollis lopez from Government and Economics
Scoop.it!

Apocalyptish

Apocalyptish | current events | Scoop.it
“THE four horsemen of the apocalypse": that was the disparaging appraisal by Richard Tol of the University of Sussex of a report published in Yokohama on March...

Via Joel Leagans
Hollis lopez's insight:

Climate change and global warming is becoming more of a problem as temeratures rise. As it becomes hotter, it becomes harder to grow crops which hurts jobs in all aspects of agriculture. With less jobs, its more affecting the United States GDP. Besides the economic standpoint, more importantly, water is drying up. global warming is an issue that needs attention and it can be helped by government spending to invest in better and cleaner energy sources.

more...
Alex Luckey's comment, April 7, 2014 3:19 PM
I never thought about how global warming could have an adverse effect on the economy but it totally makes sense, even if the economic losses wouldn't be very big. Most people have the mindset that they can't help because they're only one person so what could they possibly do to make a difference? If everyone thinks this way, the situation is obviously going to get worse. People need to stop thinking the world is a lost cause and start doing something about these issues. I believe that if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem. This is an extremely important issue and spending money to help solve these environmental problems shouldn't even be a question.
nazlia's comment, April 8, 2014 12:31 AM
As climate changes and global warming becomes an increasingly bigger problem, it also become more and more inevitable. It will be difficult and expensive to alter lifestyles to be more 'Earth-friendly' . Precautions should have been taken much earlier before the problem became popular. It is interesting that the warmer climate change will lengthen growing season and produce more crops. Although this is a very helpful positive outcome of warmer climate change, I believe the negative outcomes are greater.
Mayline Zhong's comment, May 21, 2014 1:40 PM
It bothers me that some people can be so ignorant. The fact that our climate is changing is apparent. In the past, people were able to blow it off as misinterpreted data or exaggerated conjectures, but it is way past that point now. If people are still in denial about global warming they are actually stupid. No offense. The effects of climate change are extensive as seen in this article and if we don't do something to stop it now it will soon become irreversible. Well, it already is kind of irreversible.
Scooped by Hollis lopez
Scoop.it!

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

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.
Hollis lopez's insight:

Stephanie Gosk introduces the danger and beauty of emailing. Once send is pressed, the email is tranfered from "the cloud" to the recipient. Google has hardware data bases in America and other parts of the world. The only way around getting mixed up in it, write a letter.

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. 

Rescooped by Hollis lopez from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 11/12 or 11/13 -- 2nd or 4 -- Supreme Court hears argument on prayer at government meetings [UPDATE]

BY 11/12 or 11/13 -- 2nd or 4 -- Supreme Court hears argument on prayer at government meetings [UPDATE] | current events | Scoop.it
The U.S. Supreme Court heard argument Wednesday on the constitutionality of opening government meetings with prayer, but the justices seemed unsure how to rule.

Via Teresa Herrin
Hollis lopez's insight:

The article is reviewing a case invloving the prayer at the opening of government meeting. A ladyis suing on the fact that she has freedom of prayer and does not feel that these chrisitan being forced onto her are constitutional. I believe that prayer and religion should be removed from all things in government. It has no right to include everyone in a certian groups beliefs.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:45 PM

The case won't be settled anytime soon due to that covers  controversial issues between the First Amendment rights of freedom of religion and speech, and the separation of church and state. It will be interesting to see where Anthony Kennedy's vote goes toward on this case.

Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:17 PM

I can't understand this government's "endorsement of religion". Does the free excercise clause only pertain to prohibition of enacting a single religion? Does it exclude the right to be proud of having a religion? Would it be distasteful if a teacher wear a rosary? As long as a religion is not enforced upon the unsastisfied individual, then let the government and its civil servants be humans with religions (practice as they so choose to).

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 1:29 PM

This article talks about prayers being said in a court room. I don't see why this is such a controversy, let people be and pray if they want to. Yes I get the separation of church and state thing, but this really doesnt affect the "state".

Scooped by Hollis lopez
Scoop.it!

BY 11/21 -- America's Free Speech is Perplexing to the Rest of the World

BY 11/21 -- America's Free Speech is Perplexing to the Rest of the World | current events | Scoop.it
While even highly offensive speech is protected in the U.S., that level of freedom is quite unique.
Hollis lopez's insight:

The article talks about the differences in the freedom of speech in the United States and European countries.  America has been restricted in freedom of speech when it comes close to causing violence. In France, freedom of speech is limited becuase it is a crime to offend or express religious hatred. I believe that you should be allowed to freedom of speech even if it offends other beliefs or religions. If our right to express what we feel is taken away, then how do  you let others know what your stance is on issues.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:52 PM

Although many nations around the world are democracies, the U.S is unique because it gives its people more personal freedom. The U.S. isn't conscerned with other people getting offended, as long as each person has the right to expression it is okay. The only ban that we have on this is clear and present danger. There are certain guidlines that have developed in order to rule an action potentially dangerous or not. Other countries are astounded by this practice.

Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:38 PM

No protections for those that shrieks obscenities and the clause to discern speeches that invokes clear and present danger are there. This just lacks bold enforcement. Governments are scared of crazy Americans' revolts and teachers fear students. Of course the rest of the world looks down on us. We lack culture, sophistication and moderation.

 

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:32 PM

This article talks about how France prohibited people from talking about prophet mohammad and how although they are a democratic country free speech is not as open as it is in the US over there are stricter rules. I think one of the great things about America is the freedom to make your own choices and speak up and how you are aloud to say what you want. People who have problems with the government are aloud to voice there opinions here it would be against the 1st amendment to limit free speech. Obviously there are offensive things people should not say but we are aloud to voice our opinions when and how we want. 

Rescooped by Hollis lopez 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 | current events | 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
Hollis lopez's insight:

George Nathaniel, was fired from being a bus driver in Minneapolis for praying during the bus ride. As a pastor, he believed that with the consent of the parents and the agreement that you did not have to participate in the prayer, that it was ok. Interviews from multiple parents show diverse opinions on the subject. One parent was fine with the prayers and if the students don't want to participate then they should just ignore it. Another parernt said that it will confuse her Muslim child about how you are supposed to pray. I personally think that it was innapropriate for him to pray on a public school bus. It was even necassary for him to be fired because he was already warned once before.

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 Hollis lopez
Scoop.it!

BY 10/24 -- Rand Paul pushes constitutional amendment on Congress - Burgess Everett

BY 10/24 -- Rand Paul pushes constitutional amendment on Congress - Burgess Everett | current events | Scoop.it
Forget the Vitter amendment. Rand Paul wants to make sure that Congress can’t ever again write laws with provisions specific to lawmakers.
Hollis lopez's insight:

Rand Paul is a congressmen from Kentucky who has introduced a constitutional amendment that will inhibit senators and representatives from passing laws that dont apply to all Americans equally, including congress, the executive branch and the supreme court. This amendement is targeted at Obamacaree.  Specifically it is aimed at Supreme Court Justice John Roberts whose vote halted the Affordable Care Act.

more...
Melissa Aleman's curator insight, November 11, 2013 6:00 AM

In this article, Rand Paul is pitching the idea to add an amendment that prohibits Congress from passing laws that Congress is exempt from and having to dealin with lawmakers. Its clearly aimed at Obamacare for the reasons that when it is in action, exchanges must be made by the congressmen and rulings from the O.P.M. in order to receive federal contributions. It is unlikely that Congress will go for more restrictions.

Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 7:53 PM

A kentucky senator, Rand Paul, wants an amendment forbidding senators and representatives to pass laws that don't apply equally to Congress and the citizens. Specifically aimed at Obamacare, this amendment will force lawmakers to disclose exchanges and rulings from the Office of Personnel Management in order to receive federal employer contributions. Amending the Constitution requires a majority vote in both chambers before it can be ratified, and I think Paul has a difficult task ahead of him to convince lawmakers to give up their authority to make laws.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 20, 2014 11:54 PM

This article tells us that Rand Paul wants an amendment forbidding senators and representatives to pass laws that don't apply equally to Congress and the citizens. Paul specifically aims this at Obamacare, his proposed amendment will force lawmakers to disclose exchanges and rulings from the Office of Personnel Management in order to receive federal employer contributions. It seems Paul has a difficult task ahead of him to convince lawmakers to give up their authority to make laws because amending the Constitution requires a majority vote in both chambers before it can be ratified.

Rescooped by Hollis lopez from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 10/15 --CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin explains the debt ceiling

BY 10/15  --CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin explains the debt ceiling | current events | 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
Hollis lopez's insight:

This video was a great explantion to me of what would really happen if we did reach the debt ceiling. I now know that if we had reached it then there would have been difficult choices on who to spend money on.

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.

Scooped by Hollis lopez
Scoop.it!

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

Video: Denis McDonough: 'Outraged' at Ted Cruz's Al Qaeda comments | current events | 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.
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 Hollis lopez
Scoop.it!

Obama Tests Limits of Power in Syrian Conflict

Obama Tests Limits of Power in Syrian Conflict | current events | Scoop.it
President Obama’s approach to Syria is likely to create an important precedent in the often murky legal question of when presidents or nations may lawfully use military force.
more...
Tianna Kelly's curator insight, September 11, 2013 1:23 PM

I don't understand President Obama's statement that we must attack Syria because of U.S. national interests. What interests are these? Also, while Obama does legally have the right to launch a military attack on Syria without Congressional approval, the fact that public opinion says that we should not intervene, and that the U.S. is a supposed Democratic country, mean that he should not take it upon himself to act outside of public and Congressional approval. Otherwise, how is he any better than Assad?

Sammy Masri's curator insight, September 17, 2013 1:13 AM

I think Obama was facing all of this superficial, but ever-growing, pressure to do something about Syria, ANYTHING, as long as he just didn't sit idly by. Then, when he finally chose his only viable path (at the time), most people balked at the severity. Iraq and Afghanistan linger more than Kuwait, Kosovo, and Libya. Saving face became the only possible measure afterwards, and forget the actual politics, weapons, and lives at stake.

My personal opinion, of course.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 18, 2014 12:31 PM

Events like this happen in hundreds of different countries yet the US has never gotten involved. Also, the law against chemical weapons is international, therefore, the United Nations should be dealing with this, not the US alone. Of course, the UN would never go for it seeing as how Russia is an ally of the Syrian government. more importantly the situation is lose, lose. We do not need to be involved in this fight, it's not ours.

Rescooped by Hollis lopez from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

Senator Cruz: Why I’ll vote no on Syria strike

Senator Cruz: Why I’ll vote no on Syria strike | current events | Scoop.it
It’s not the job of U.S. troops to police international norms.

Via Teresa Herrin
Hollis lopez's insight:

American military should defend the U.S., not stick its neck out in the middle of a syrian revolution invloving chemical weapons.

more...
Teresa Herrin's curator insight, September 9, 2013 10:00 PM

I will always SCOOP news related to the Texas Congressional Delegation.

Rescooped by Hollis lopez from Government and Economics
Scoop.it!

Why a Ruthless Hillary Clinton and a Ruthless Chris Christie Aren’t the Same Thing

Why a Ruthless Hillary Clinton and a Ruthless Chris Christie Aren’t the Same Thing | current events | Scoop.it
Let us now praise ruthless men. And women. The two most talked-about potential presidential candidates in 2016 are enduring public examinations of their ruthlessness. In New Jersey federal investigators, the legislature, and the press are looking at whether Gov. Chris Christie knew aides in his office sought to punish a local...

Via Joel Leagans
Hollis lopez's insight:

This is a perspective issue that voters and the American public have on politicians. As it was stated in the article, “What voters find slick in Bill Clinton, they find ruthless in Hillary,”. This outlook on Hillary' s tough persona can be viewed as ruthless by some and smart by others. In politics, you have to be willing to go to that next step to influence voters. 

more...
Danielle Shahin's comment, April 3, 2014 4:59 PM
than a man. To prove she can. Get the job done
Danielle Shahin's comment, April 3, 2014 4:59 PM
than a man. To prove she can. Get the job done
Paulina Ho's comment, April 4, 2014 4:16 PM
If you're going to go into politics, there is no doubt you will gain enemies. If you let people walk all over you, you will not be respected and you will not get anywhere. I understand that you need to be aggressive and active as a politician, standing for your own beliefs and always moving towards your goals, but at the same time, there should be a limit- a limit that HC wasn't too aware of back in the day. But at the end of the day, it is her life and her decision on how to pursue her goals. If she feels that she needs to have a list of people who have done her wrong, then let her be. i'm sure there are male politicians who are just as ruthless BUT no one says anything about it, because stereotypes say that men are supposed to be cunning, while women are supposed to be open and sensitive. It's the 21st century now and there are women in the world of politics, there will be ruthless women among the field of ruthless men.
Scooped by Hollis lopez
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.
Hollis lopez's insight:

The video begins with congratualting twitter for gaining $10 Billion on the first day of trading stock. Twitter is a useful tool for politicians. All 100 senators have one and 97% of the House have accounts. "It's one of the easiest ways to get your message out." Twitter has now transformed politics to instant news.

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!

Scooped by Hollis lopez
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.
Hollis lopez's insight:

Texas Governor, Rick Perry takes a trip to the battleground state, Iowa. He talks about Chris Christie's victory in a democratic state. Rick Perry supports Ted Cruz's 21 hour speech and says it was necessary to tell Obama about his falty healthcare plan. I wouldnt support him in the election.

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 Hollis lopez 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 | current events | 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
Hollis lopez's insight:

Texas, one of the six states that are not complying with the Defense Secretary, Chuck Hagels's order that all gay spouses of the National Guard be given the same federal marriage benefits as heterosexual spouses. The six states feel that this order conflicts with their state law that they dont allow same sex marraige and they wont follow these orders. I believe that if a federal offical gives an order to all U.S. states, then all U.S. states should comply.

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. 

Scooped by Hollis lopez
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 | current events | Scoop.it
Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray are likely to at least set a friendly tone during budget talks.
Hollis lopez's insight:

The article discussed and compares the Budget Committee Heads. Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray seem to have different characteristics and opinions in many different aspects. I think that Paul Ryans budget plan will be the strongest. The two committee heads have both lowered their expectations for the meeting so we do not expect much happen.

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 Hollis lopez
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. | current events | Scoop.it
The Wall Street Journal on the liberal claim that website problems don't matter when your intentions are good.
Hollis lopez's insight:

The article talks about the problems of the website Healthcare.gov. This poorly set up website has multiple issues varying from outdated technology to a hotline that sends you to a never ending loop of problems. The website does not refelect the type of professional stature that Obama wants and does no more than add to the list of things that anti obamacare citizens have to say. Obama needs to straighten up his plan and make sure they will help reach his intended goal of having universal American health care.

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.

Scooped by Hollis lopez
Scoop.it!

10 ways a government shutdown would affect your daily life

Hollis lopez's insight:

As a person new to the idea of the Government shutting down,  this article really helped me understand how possible October 1st shuttdown would effect me. I think the first thing that caught my eye from this article was the statement that a little less than 50% of employees wont be working during the shutdown. Also there will be no pay for the gov. employees that do work. The army will be paid in " I-O-Us".

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Hollis lopez 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 | current events | 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
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 Hollis lopez 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 | current events | 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
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. 

Scooped by Hollis lopez
Scoop.it!

US military sick and tired of war, have no faith in government

US military sick and tired of war, have no faith in government | current events | Scoop.it
The US government has no more credibility with the American people and the military that are “sick and tired” of war which has now lasted for 13 years, Gordon Duff, a marine veteran has told RT.
more...
No comment yet.