George Walters AP Government
4 views | +0 today
Follow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by George Walters
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 | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
While even highly offensive speech is protected in the U.S., that level of freedom is quite unique.
George Walters's insight:

It's interesting to take a step  back and observe what other Western countries (and Eastern countries too for that matter!) have in the ways of policy. I'm going to go ahead and side with France on this particular case. There's nothing to be gained from bashing on other peoples religions so publicy. People should be able to have their own opinions, and let them be heard when they aren't going to start riots or anything, but France was correct in this particular instance. It's risky to really start regulating this kind of thing though, because then the government is in charge of what's okay and what isn't okay to be said publicly and that leads to bigger problems. America is doing fine without regulating people's voices (although boy, some people could really be better off silenced) and shouldn't worry unless violence is going to be a direct result from that act of speech.

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 George Walters 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 | George Walters AP Government | 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
George Walters's insight:

It just feels like nobody is giving the law a chance to really play out before trying to  completely re-make it or destroy it completely. Republicans lost the vote and need to stop trying to dismante the law. Democrats need to realize that what they have is probably all that they can pass right now, and that they should really give it a chance to be worked with. The law right now is fine - there are plenty of small errors with its implementations but nothing so large as to require a major rewrite of the law. There is absolutely no reason to overcomplicate the issue right now.

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.
Rescooped by George Walters 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 | George Walters AP Government | 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
George Walters's insight:

I don't really think that the troubles of the Affordable Care Act's first month in action are really anything to worry about. As people understand the new policies and the website gets fixed up, people are going to start signing up more and more for coverage. Obama wants what is best for the people, and hasn't meant to cause people to lose their coverage, and so I'm sure he'll fix his mistakes. He's an honest guy who wants to cover as many people as possible. By the end of Obama's second term, people won't remember what a struggle Obamacare was to implement, but just see the effects of the plan after implementation.

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 George Walters 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 | George Walters AP Government | 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
George Walters's insight:

Wow. When it's a national law, you can't just ignore it and cite your own state laws as superior. These states need to realize that the supremacy clause is a real thing and to deny gay couples their rights is beyond ridiculous. I feel like someone has to get in some major trouble for this but I wouldn't really know who to blame. Perhaps one of these couples will take Texas to court. That would be cool. If the supreme court ruled to support gay rights already, they should in the future. Although its not a problem of just law, as we've already seen. This needs to be enforced.

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 George Walters 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 | George Walters AP Government | 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
George Walters's insight:

Interesting video. I'd never heard of this religion before, nor the law, but wow. The estimate about where the court case is going to go sounds pretty reasonable. If lives are put in danger because of the religion, the lives of the many are more important than the religion of the few. It's interesting to consider how often this sort of thing must happen though, and each case is separate. I'm sure 99% of Americans have never even heard of snake handling happening during church. Surely more debatable cases come up that are even more bizarre.

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. 

Scooped by George Walters
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.
George Walters's insight:

As Mr. Clark once famously said "If your message is being restricted to 150 characters, there is literally no chance that what you have to say is intelligent and should be sent to everyone you know and a hell of a lot of people you don't know." Twitters stock price might be up, but its lost $150 million dollars in the past year and has no profits in the near future. Problems arise when you price a good that isn't sold or makes any revenue but is just assigned a stock price "where it would be if it were to monetize." It's risky business, and Twitter doesn't seem terribly stable. Like Myspace, I suspect Twitter will soon be replaced with something superior and promptly forgotten.

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 George Walters
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!) | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
In the 12 months since his reelection, the president has achieved far less than he expected and suffered one mishap after another.
George Walters's insight:

"Some of this was just bad luck" is a major understatement. Almost this entire article was out of the grasp of what Obama can control, and to blame him for unfortunately world events makes no sense. Most of his policies have been very well founded, and to stop supporting him because of this makes no sense. But what do ratings mean for Obama anyway? He can't run for reelection, and the textbooks will always remember him for Obamacare and his evasion of war in Syria. He has no reason to worry about his ratings, and should focus on the correct policies, not the correct political decisions to aim for reelection because he can't be reelected anyway.

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.
Scooped by George Walters
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 | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray are likely to at least set a friendly tone during budget talks.
George Walters's insight:

I'm suspicious of the Republican strategy here. I'm inclined to think that they're stalling, doing the bare minimum for now and then when the Republican party is more unified in its approach and possibly has a greater representation in the White House or in Congress then they can try to carry out the budget policy that they've been working at for a while. But with the current outlook, Republicans can't really fight for much since they themselves can't even decide what they want as a party. 

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 George Walters
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 | George Walters AP Government | 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.
George Walters's insight:

Well, what does it matter if your email is private or not? For 99% of Americans, nothing would change at all if the government or companies like Google or Yahoo screened every message ever sent. People are obsessed with privacy because we're still sore about having our rights taken away from us by the English all those hundreds of years ago, and our society as a whole has developed a culture obsessed with the rights that are so adamantly needed. Google and Yahoo! are doing the world a terrific service and to be offended by the inherent lack of privacy involved with the service they provide is ridiculous.

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 George Walters
Scoop.it!

BY 10/31 -- Nightly News: Obama’s approval rating drops to all-time low

BY 10/31 -- Nightly News: Obama’s approval rating drops to all-time low | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams
George Walters's insight:

I find myself saying this just a little bit too often on this approval posts, but really - who cares? Obama has nothing to prove anymore. He's passed the legistlation he wanted to get passed, he survived the government shutdown and Syria and all of that jazz, and he can't run for reelection anyway - he doesn't need approval ratings and he knows it. Who is voting for his approval ratings anyway? I feel like you must be very very opiniated to actually voice your opinion for his approval ratings, so his ratings would actually be lower than they'd be if everyone responded. Most people, I feel like, don't really have any large problems with Obama's presidency that they can justify. Most people who say that they dislike Obamacare also say that they support the Affordable Care Act - and why not?! It's affordable! The truth is, the American public knows almost nothing about politics, and while its sad to think about, it just goes to show that we should leave Washington to do what Washington does because the government functions best when it isn't worried about approval ratings or anything like that.

more...
Melissa Aleman's curator insight, December 20, 2013 3:00 PM

This video explains the president's approval ratings have dropped and the affect Obama's leadership has on the nation.  I think the trials of Obama have been difficult and must be difficult for him to juggle everything. It makes sense as to why Obama has lost approval ratings because the public is tired of not getting what was promised. Especially now with the NSA leaks as well...He may continue to lose approval.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 25, 2014 5:39 PM

It's not shocking that President Obama's presidential rating and personal rating have gotten dropped to an all-time low. I agree that President Obama should show more involvement with fixing the Obamacare issues because as of right now he's shown very little, and that's one of the many reasons his rating is so low.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 11:47 PM

Obamas ratings have dropped a lot since the beginning of his presidency the obamacare does not seem to be working out for him very well. His ratings used to be a lot higher and now they are making a record breaking low. 

Scooped by George Walters
Scoop.it!

BY 10/31-- Sebelius apologizes for healthcare website debacle

BY 10/31-- Sebelius apologizes for healthcare website debacle | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams
George Walters's insight:

I think its pretty honorable that she can take the blame like that. Too many politicians these days are afraid to admit blame and instead push it elsewhere and only cause further tensions between parties. There's nothing to be gained in a situation like this for blaming anyone else.. Admitting her mistakes was definitely the best political move. In terms of the actual questions brought to the table, she did a good job of answering them as straightforwardly as she could. It's obvious she's very hopeful about the program even though the launch was quite unsuccessful.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:09 PM

Sebelius keeps apologizing for the problems with the Obamacare website, taking complete responsibility for the dysfunctionality of the incident. Officials in charge also reassure the public that, within 30 days, the site will be up and ready to be used to sign up for coverage.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 25, 2014 4:40 PM

This video tells us how Sebelius takes the blame for the failed lauch of Obamacare. Sge later ended up answering the people's questions based on promises the president made. I think it was smart of Sebelius to take the blame for it because it encourages people to trust her and she is wise in saving others deserving of blame.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 7:47 PM
I dont like Obama so I do not really like his healthcare and the fact that the website was having problems makes it even more sketchy and harder for it to be promoted and talked about well.
Scooped by George Walters
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 | George Walters AP Government | 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.
George Walters's insight:

It seems like a fair enough idea, but actual implementation would be a nightmare, I imagine. If such a bill were to cause Congress to rehash all the prior laws that would break this one, it really wouldn't be possible. Obamacare can't be passed again after revisions. And is the topic a serious enough to go through the trouble? It seems that only once in a blue moon would laws be passed that are expressly targeted at congressional members or omitting congressional members. I'm afraid that Paul has more sinister motives, such as trying to abolish Obamacare by writing a law that Obamacare would then break.

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.

Scooped by George Walters
Scoop.it!

BY 10/22 or 10/23 -- Inside the Bush, Cheney relationship

BY 10/22 or 10/23 -- Inside the Bush, Cheney relationship | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
Peter Baker talks about his book, “Days of Fire: Bush and Cheney in the White House.” He calls the relationship between the duo, “one that drifted apart.”
George Walters's insight:

Interesting video. Reminds me a little bit of how NBA players will sometimes get frustrated working with one another but ultimately know that they need one another in the long run. It begs the question of how Biden and Obama's relationship is? The largest stresses for Cheney and Bush seems to largely be based off of major political stresses (Iraq, 9/11, pardoning, etc.), which Obama's presidency has had its fair share of (Afghanistan, Obamacare and the government shutdown, Syria, etc.).

more...
Chris Buenaseda's curator insight, November 4, 2013 7:14 PM

The video explains how Cheney was influential in Bush's decision-making, but less and less was he influential towards the end of Bush's 2nd term. This discussion was very interesting to watch as it painted Dick Cheney in another light, other than being the lackey to the younger Bush. Without Cheney's participation and adcive, Bush wouldn't have lasted the White House for past one term.

 

Melissa Aleman's curator insight, November 10, 2013 11:11 PM

This video discusses the relationship between Bush in cheney and how it was not all as it seems and in their new book, Days of Fire, you can see that. All though they had their differences and grew distant they came together when needed. I think it was a nice video and good to hear a little behind the scenes of the truth of their relationship and how it wasnt all good.

 

Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 6:28 PM

 This video is about bush and chaney while they where in the white house. It outlines the breaking and falling apart of their relationship and how bush really didn't have any power and chaney was the one really making the decisions, like a "puppet master". I think that their relationship as friends and as colleges was strained due to the media, the policy agenda and the war in Iraq.

Scooped by George Walters
Scoop.it!

Town of Greece v. Galloway -- Brief History of the Establishment Clause

Town of Greece v. Galloway -- Brief History of the Establishment Clause | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
George Walters's insight:

Separation of Church and State is extremely important to make sure that everyone is treated fairly and properly, but to go to the trouble to eliminate any mentioning of the word "God" in government is a little bit overboard. On every piece of American currency it is etched, "In God We Trust." To take this "issue" to the Federal level and re-do so much of what we've already done just to not offend people is a little bit absurd. And this is coming from an athiest. There's nothing to gain from being overly politically correct. 

more...
Ross Techmanski's curator insight, December 17, 2013 10:01 PM

i think when it comes to seperation of religion and state there dose need to to be a wall.  i think in recent court cases they are seperating to much.  for example i think the commen religion that dose establish a god should be recognize.  in the santa fe case it is ok to say a prayer befor a game.  we are a majority rules country and if only 3 percent of the population proclaimes themself athiest it is ok to pray to a genral god for safty before a game.

Maddie Callen's curator insight, December 20, 2013 11:34 AM

The article does a good job explaining the history of the establishment clause. The article is about a town that conducts prayers before every town meeting. Some small towns are predominatly one religion and no one will get offended or have a problem with it but the governmnet will insist on prohibiting this. Some take the amendment literally in that there should be a seperation between church and state but they should be able to step in on a case like this.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 10:26 PM
In the video clips they talk about what is and is not okay based off of the informal amendments to the ways of Americans. I think religious cases are interesting and i think it is important to have separation of the church and state.
Rescooped by George Walters 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 | George Walters AP Government | 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
George Walters's insight:

I feel like the questions answered here are some of the few questions about Obamacare that most people should know already. Other questions are - why are people so against Obamacare? Why have only 100,000 people signed up for it so far? Why is it so hard for the Obama administration to create a website that functions properly? When such a large part of America doesn't even recognize that the Affordable Care Act and Obamacare are the same thing, it's almost comical that everyone is tearing Obama apart without even really knowing why. It's also funny that everyone is making such a big deal about his ratings going down. Who is rating him anyway? I know I'm not. 

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.
Rescooped by George Walters 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 | George Walters AP Government | 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
George Walters's insight:

As an athiest I can kind of understand why he was fired, but at the same time, he isn't hurting anyone. In fact he sounds like a nice guy, actually involving himself in conversation and so forth with the kids. In my experience, bus drivers usually work as just wage slaves and fail to make the best of their job working with kids. If he's FORCING kids to pray with him, then I would understand why he should be fired. I guess the school district was afraid that there would be a lawsuit or something on their hands, which is understandable. He probably should of stopped praying after they told him to. But I also don't think he deserved to be fired.

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. 

Rescooped by George Walters 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] | George Walters AP Government | 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
George Walters's insight:

While it is promoting Christian beliefs, and I can understand why non-Christians on the board would be offended, this one case would affect such a huge portion of the nation that I'm sure a lot of people aren't ready for. I feel like the supreme court judges feel similarly, where the prayers probably should be abolished but maybe not on a national scale. Nobody is being hurt by the prayers, and to escalate things to the national scene is a little brave. We'll see how it ends up playing out but I'd be very surprised, especially given this courts decisions on previous similar cases, if they end up banning prayer in the work place.

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 George Walters
Scoop.it!

BY 11/10 or 11/11 (1 or 4 total) -- Did A Supreme Court Justice Just Admit To Being An Atheist?

BY 11/10 or 11/11 (1 or 4 total) -- Did A Supreme Court Justice Just Admit To Being An Atheist? | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week in a case about the constitutionality of a New York town's practice of beginning local legislative meetings with mostly Christian prayers.
George Walters's insight:

It's kind of sad that this is a big deal in this country still. Aren't we past the importance of race and religion in power positions? While it obviously isn't a prudent move to admit to being an athiest when running for office, if you're already in position and have nothing to lose by admitting that you're an athiest why hide your religious believes? Furthermore, why blow those up? Non-religious people should be able to make morally correct decisions, and follow the laws of the Constitution in the same way that any religious person could. This shouldn't be a big story in the news.

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:05 PM

I can see how this irritates people but not enough to ....offend them. Seriously? Who cares if people are praying, "beginning legislative meetings with Christian prayers" is a practice done by Christians (if they're so fervent, FOR CHRISTIANS. If you are not a part of that group, then shut them out and look bored. 1st Amendment protects freedom of religion, so are judges and politicans not the people? Getting upset over such trivial matter, beliefs inherent in a faith BELIEVED by THE PEOPLE --is in itself a discrimination. I refuse to pity those that feel "outcasted", if you're so bold on nonconforming, you're expected to be 'strong' when people practice their religions. Not weak and complaining all the time.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 1:02 PM

This article talks about Justice Breyer and how he admitted to being an atheist. I don't really think that this should be of much importance, even as a christian myself, because our nation is based on separtion or church and state, right? If a justice chooses to be an atheist, then let them.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 11:12 PM

I think that the supreme court has made it a point to be very neutral when it comes to religion topics and that in public situations no religions should be favored. But all of the supreme court members have always been religious so it is interesting that he may be athiest and it would be interesting to see how the country would perceive that. 

Scooped by George Walters
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.
George Walters's insight:

I find it interesting how unsupportive of Christie Perry was. His blatant opposition to other Republican candidates and his tour of Iowa could very well be an early hint that he's running for 2016 candidacy. I think that Christie is another possible candidate, as well as Bush and even Palin. Perry is most likely too conservative for the public to select as President and I feel like most Republicans are going to be able to see that, and so I see Christie being selected as the Republican nominee despite Perry's early campaining. But all is up in the air in the game of politics!

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 George Walters from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY Friday, 11/8 --ONLY ONE Scoop -- Nate Silver on 'This Week' (See the instructions for your Scoop)

ESPN's Nate Silver, the roundtable analyze the political picture for the 2014 election.


Via Teresa Herrin
George Walters's insight:

It's always interesting to hear of Republicans winning in heavily blue states. Christie must be doing something right. Or is it really just a loss for Democrats? Perhaps the younger demographics, minorities and women weren't targetted well enough in their attempts to get out the vote. In such a heavily blue state there should be no excuses to lose the vote, especially by such a large margin. The tea party is relatively small, still, and to think that Christie is a likable enough figure to overcome the disparities of parties is laughable.  This wasn't a republican win at all but a democratic defeat.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:29 PM

This video discussed the chances of Republicans or Democrats winning the House in the upcoming midterm elections. Many of the issues that seem to be swaying voters one way or another are social issues, so if they want to win, they need to choose the social issues that appeal to the largest amount of voters.. Voters want to vote for a candidate that they think is most like themselves. 

Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 3:16 PM

Congressional approval rating is down to 12% approved due to the Repubs' demand for a shutdown and the Demos' disorganized healthcare bill. Guesses for the coming House election has Demos and Repubs on an equal stand, Demos leading by only 8%. Who's to say states are getting ready to shift colors. 8% is nothing to give the wins to Demos. The healthcare bill doesn't seem to work itself out anytime soon, and as laid offs increase, the anger for govt shutdown decreases over time. I don't see any faction in the lead, the 48 to 40 percent will equal out quite soon.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 28, 2014 7:18 PM

This video talks about how Nate Silver predicted 2012's election outcome. Later the midterm election is talked about. Apparently the rating fot democrats and republicans are low because of  the government shut down and problems with  Obamacare.It's evedently clear that the minority opinion is becoming stonger and stronger.

Scooped by George Walters
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 | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
Cory Booker becomes ninth African-American to serve in the Senate, replacing Frank Lautenberg.
George Walters's insight:

I never realized that there were so few black senators in history. I also didn't realize that people could be appointed to the Senate, so that bit confused me a little bit. I expect that there will be a much lower average senator age in years to come, however, as well as a much greater minority represenation in Congress. You look at where education was for African Americans in the 60s and 70s compared to where it is today and it's easy to predict that there will be a far greater number of African Americans in Congress in years to come thanks to more balanced education.

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 George Walters from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 11/3 -- Secession Movement

BY 11/3 -- Secession Movement | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
Residents of rural areas feel shut out of their states' politics, so why not create their own?

Via Teresa Herrin
George Walters's insight:

This was a funny read. They took away our gun rights? WE HAVE TO SECEDE. I personally don't really see that secession would be at all feasible, seeing as how they would need a majority vote to actually secede and the whole root of the reason that they want to secede is that their opinions aren't being voiced because they're a minority party. I also believe that even if they became a majority party they still wouldn't secede because it would weaken their own representation in Congress, not to mention that most people would fight secession in interests of preserving the union. If states secede from one another there is sure to be some animosity.

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 George Walters
Scoop.it!

BY 10/31 -- NSA infiltrates links to Yahoo, Google data centers worldwide, Snowden documents say

BY 10/31 -- NSA infiltrates links to Yahoo, Google data centers worldwide, Snowden documents say | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
Agency positioned itself to collect from among millions of accounts, many belonging to Americans.
George Walters's insight:

Well..... Shouldn't the government have access too Google's records? Doesn't that make sense for national security? Google has an absurd amount of power as one of the most prominent companies worldwide.... shouldn't the US have some sort of check on that power, just in case? I don't understand why this is such an issue or why Google would care enough to encrypt their servers. It seems to me that Google is doing this as more of a publicity stunt, trying to show its customers that it's doing the best it can do to ensure their privacy, rather than actually being worried about what the US is up to.

more...
Melissa Aleman's curator insight, December 20, 2013 2:49 PM

This discusses how public networks like Yahoo and Google are being tapped into by the NSA in order to provide security for Americans through access to lots of personal info. These networks have stated they do not want their databases to be tapped into by the NSA, but that is meerely just a claim. Although, both yahoo and google have started to make a move by encrypting their data in order to prevent any hacking. I think that this is going too far. What happened to privacy? Isn't that OUR right. The NSA is using the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to justify their recent moves and decisions.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 25, 2014 5:02 PM

This article talks about the new program made by the NSA called MUSCULAR, which allows them to exploit data centers and flows from companies like Google and Yahoo. This article tells us about the negative feelings towards the federal government as overreaching its powers, the NSA says they only collect information on valid foreign targets, but who really knows.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 7:55 PM
I think that it is good for us to know what the government is doing but also it makes the USA look weak if one of our own is going and publishing private information that is vital to the security of the US. I think that on the otherhand i do not really want to know all of the spying that the government is doing i would rather not know if the gvt feels the need to infiltrate yahoo and goodle for information that they think could potentially harm the US then go ahead and do it but i think that again citizens have the rights to privacy and Snowden did a very couragous thing by standing up for the rights of the US citizens.
Scooped by George Walters
Scoop.it!

BY 10/31 -- How the NSA is infiltrating private networks

BY 10/31 -- How the NSA is infiltrating private networks | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
The NSA, working with its British counterpart, the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), secretly taps into the internal networks of Yahoo and Google, the two biggest Internet companies by overall data traffic.
George Walters's insight:

What on Earth? How has Al Qaeda won at all? I personally don't see much of anything wrong with the NSA's actions. Just because the government has access to your internet history and usage and phone calls doesn't mean that this information is public - it's just sifted through to look for potential threats to national security. Nobody cares that about the porn on your search history, or the affair you're hiding in your emails. There is no issue of privacy - there is just the government doing its best to ensure a safe America. And the question of the NSA tapping Google traffic? The government regulates and oversees everything else - why is the internet so sacred that it shouldn't be protected? If the government wanted to limit peoples rights on the internet, that I could see a reason to be upset about, but this is just ridiculous.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:12 PM

This article detailed exactly how the NSA has cracked into Google's data centers. The full repercussions of this scandalous news hack does not seem to fully register to the American public. The NSA has to be stopped and will not stop unless the American voters do something about it, whether it be through protest or voting in new representatives. It violates our constitutional rights.

Adriana Cruz's comment, January 25, 2014 3:31 PM
This article talks about how the NSA has infiltrated into the public in order to ensure safety. For example, the NSA can monitor all Google Cloud actions. It is very interesting to note that the Washington Post is willing to share this information to the public; it almost seems risky. At the same time, it makes me feel very unsafe in that the government could monitor anything that I do online.
Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 7:52 PM
It is illegal to have a website that the gvt cannot get into but that does not mean that the gvt should tap into google or yahoos networks through wiring and invade peoples private information. It is against the rights of American citizens.
Scooped by George Walters
Scoop.it!

BY 10/24 -- Ted Cruz returns to Texas as a hero who is reshaping the state Republican Party

BY 10/24 -- Ted Cruz returns to Texas as a hero who is reshaping the state Republican Party | George Walters AP Government | Scoop.it
Although a newcomer, he is rapidly becoming the model for GOP politicians throughout the state.
George Walters's insight:

Yeaaaah..... Houston is a liberal city. Perhaps there are some Republicans who show up to praise Cruz at his homecoming but Houston as a whole does not see Cruz as the hero this article portrays him to be. He is not a Houston hero. He is not a Texan hero. He is not even a Republican hero. If anything he is a hero to the Tea Party. To claim that he is reshaping the Republican party when most of the Republican party lacks all respect for the guy is laughable.

more...
Melissa Aleman's curator insight, November 11, 2013 6:14 AM

In this article, it describes how Ted Cruz is either one or the other, really liked or disliked, in the country. But right now he is very liked by Texas returning as a hero although disliked in the Senate. I like how Cruz is receiving credit in Texas because I like how he stands up for his beliefs and takes risks. I think its fascinating how they predict Texas will become purple but I dont necessarily believe that a continuously red state for multiple years will all of a sudden go purple.

 

Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:06 PM

Ted Cruz's impact on Texans and the Republican party.Cruz has inspired GOP candidates to rally for secession, rolling back immigration laws, impeaching President Obama, and amending the Constitutional direct election of Senators. People are following him and changing their views on certain things. This article also addresses the fact that Texas is becoming a more diverse state, with a fainter red part but not entirely blue part, making it a "purple state." 

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 18, 2014 5:23 PM

The article establishes Ted Cruz as a controversial senator from Texas that has quickly gained the attention of most Americans, and explains the possible political changes in Texas due to Ted Cruz. It's interesting to see that he could possibly create a major political change in Texas, where the state goes from a firmly conservative and Republican state to more of a purple state. Cruz also could possibly spark a big change in the ideology of the Republican Party.