hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO
4 views | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Hannah Davis 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 | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
A LaFollette pastor headed to court next week for having dozens of poisonous snakes at his church said the laws he allegedly violated in Tennessee infringe on his freedom of religion.

Via Teresa Herrin
Hannah Davis's insight:

This article talks about a Tennessee church minister using snakes in his church. The question is about 1st amendment violation is being critically examined. Our freedom of religion is quite a touchy subject in court and many typically do not agreed with all of the Supreme Court rulings on the subject. The Reynolds case poses the question about the constitutionality of polygamy, but it was ruled against because of religious expression. Religious case are difficult to please everyone on, however, the Supreme Court is highly respected and I would trust them to make the right decisions for the sake of the country. 

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 Hannah Davis
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.
Hannah Davis's insight:

Twitter is changing the political playing field. More and more politocians are beginning to log on with their political opinions and this comes as no real surprise. Twitter allows politicians to quickly back up something they may have said in a news article or interview. It also allows political news to travel much faster and effectively. I thought that this clip was very interesting because its quite likely that the politicians themselves don't do much of the posting, rather it could managed by a staff. Technology is advancing and its very refreshing to see older generations and professionals adapting as quickly as they are.  


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

The graphic in this article outlines the steady decline in Obama approval ratings. This is most likely a result of media influence. The media is always looking for flaws in our country's leader and it does not come as a surprise that they are all over the Obama problems. They tend to focus solely on the negative aspects of Obama's presidency sucha s the issues with ObamaCare, NSA spying panic, and leaves out the positives so as to create more "breaking news". This is effective because it appeals to people's emotions but really takes a toll on the president. For the most part, the media is responsible for the American abandonment of our president.  

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 Hannah Davis
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 | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray are likely to at least set a friendly tone during budget talks.
Hannah Davis's insight:

 This article discusses the ways that Rep. Patty Murray and Rep. Paul Ryan, heads of the budget committee, handle the pressing budget problem. the two representatives have agreed to meet on wednesday to discuss their plans. Hopefully after this meeting, they will reach a solution that benefits everyone. 

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 Hannah Davis
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 | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
Video on msnbc.com: Critical questions are being raised about data safety in light of hacking reports and news about NSA data collection. NBC’s Stephanie Gosk explains what happens after you hit ‘send’ on an email message.
Hannah Davis's insight:

Once sent, emails are sent through an elaborate system controlled by the companies like google and yahoo. Many wonder who has or can access email by hacking these companies. 

I think that email is protected well by these companies, their datacenters are very secure, and it would take a supernatural genius to hack into such a center. 

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 Hannah Davis
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 | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | 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.
Hannah Davis's insight:

Rand Paul is trying to pass an amendmen that will make all laws apply to all branches of government. He wants everyone in these branches to be required to have obamacare. He also takes a stab at the Chief Justice in his opinion. I think he knows that the amendment won't pass but he still wants the media to see his side of the arguement. 

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 Hannah Davis
Scoop.it!

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

BY 10/22 or 10/23 -- Inside the Bush, Cheney relationship | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | 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.”
Hannah Davis's insight:

This video is about Bush and Cheney's relationship at the white house. They started out great at the beginning of Bush's term but then slowly deteriorated. Things began when the war alliances didnt work out correctly and therefore Cheney and Bush slowly ended up on different sides of every arguement. Cheney was often secretly fighting against Bush inside the white house. The relationship changed especially when Bush contributed to the incrimination of Scooter Libby. The Bush Cheney presidency felt compelled to protect americans from ever becoming attacked again, from there Cheney wanted to also divert to other things, but the president could not move past it and from there they diverged. 

 

Bush was a complex president. Many people don't give him enough credit from what he did while in the white house. He did make some mistakes but he also helped our country through a really emotional time. The drift apart from Cheney was a result of unfortunate difference in priorities following this rough period and snowballed right into other issues. 

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.

Rescooped by Hannah Davis from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

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

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

Via Teresa Herrin
Hannah Davis's insight:

Many people have been saying that there is too much politics in Washington, but really politics have collapsed. Obama and the tea party are frowning on the Madisionian structure of politics, dislike the forced compromise that the system requires. The different negotiations with lots of people makes easy legislation difficult to come by. The tea party clearly needs to make some sacrifices or it will lose the power that it has gain in the last few years. 

 

This article showed an interesting approach to what is going on with the tea party and Obama. I think that their mutual desire to toss the Madisonian model is fickle and I think that forced compromise is what is best for the opponents. Because after all forced compromise is what teaches us humility and the lesson that we don't always get exactly what we want.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rescooped by Hannah Davis from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 10/17 -- Red-blue division isn’t so black and white

BY 10/17 -- Red-blue division isn’t so black and white | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
Video on msnbc.com: Although most Americans have been told the U.S. is sharply divided by red and blue, an Esquire/NBC News survey indicates a majority of the country actually falls in the middle. NBC’s Chuck Todd reports.

Via Teresa Herrin
Hannah Davis's insight:

I know that I fall in the middle because of many of the conflicting beliefs that I hold. I think that most people are raised to think that there are Republicans and Democrats, I didn't know that there were other parties until two years ago. This beliefs prevents many people from allowing themselves to believe what they want because they feel obligated to agree with their party's beliefs. 

more...
Rabika Rehman's curator insight, October 18, 2013 12:49 AM

Most of the people lie in between republican and democrat. They share similar ideas.I agree with the fact that people should be chosen by the merit not their heredity or racial groups. The colleges should be diverse,but diverse with different ideas and personalities not necessary different skin tones.

Elaine Shen's curator insight, October 18, 2013 8:34 AM

I can relate to those who stand in the middle sector of the two major political parties because while I am conservative on economic issues, I am pretty liberal on most social issues, the definition of a libertarian, a party that is suggested to be on the rise in this news article. Although they give other names such as the 'whatever man,' I think that the radicalization of the two policial parties, as seen in the past week of the government shutdown, shows that Americans are not going to be willing to also radicalize- rather they are going to take the middle route that shows compromise among the American constituents beliefs.

Anja Parikh's curator insight, October 20, 2013 2:13 PM

This video is about the "growing political center" that a majority Americans fall into that indicates that we are not just a red or blue country and Americans have become more pragmatic in our political beliefs. Americans in the middle, according to the survey, believe that the government is spending too much money, and a majority also support gay marriage and legalization of marijuana. The people that categorize themselves as members of the "center group" say that they don't feel they belong in either the Democratic nor the Republican party.

Scooped by Hannah Davis
Scoop.it!

Ted Cruz enters record books with 21-hour filibuster

Ted Cruz enters record books with 21-hour filibuster | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
Sen. Ted Cruz’s filibuster had become the fourth-longest in Senate history and was still going Wednesday morning, as the Texas Republican continued to hold the chamber floor to highlight the GOP’s effort to defund Obamacare.
Hannah Davis's insight:

First off, I want to congratulate Senator Ted Cruz that took a lot of guts and energy. I think that his fight against Obamacare rigging is duefully needed. This was the best way to get attention and I think that it was very effective in changing minds and starting productive conversation. 

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Hannah Davis from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

Why America Is Saying 'No': @peggynoonannyc on Obama and Syria

Why America Is Saying 'No': @peggynoonannyc on Obama and Syria | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
Syria and Obama: Wrong time, wrong place, wrong plan, wrong man, argues Peggy Noonan.

Via Teresa Herrin
Hannah Davis's insight:

Personally I agree with Noonan. Obama is not a wartime president. He never wanted to be and he isn't up for the job. Especially concerning this crisis, he picked the wrong time to get involved. Already with our trillion dollars in debt we can't afford to make payments, using up the funds that we no longer have now for an issue that doesnt directly affect us is very damaging to the economy and I don't think that we have a good enough plan to even consider this attack. 

more...
Will Levine's curator insight, September 11, 2013 12:35 AM

This country's response was very good in my opinion in the respect that the majority of us do not want to go to war with Syria and activate our military action. Obama seems to be not fully clear on how to deal with the situation although I admire his decision in not going to war and to do this in a peaceful way.

carlosdgarcia's curator insight, September 11, 2013 10:16 PM

Noonan is right. There is no need for a military intervention. There is nothing to prove, it won't do anything besides have American causalties. Something DOES need to be done though, and the best thing could possibly be what the pope said. Punish Assad and whoever else allowed the chemical weapons to be used. And who cares what Iran and North Korea think. Let them judge.

Melissa Aleman's curator insight, September 11, 2013 11:50 PM

I thouroughly enjoyed this article because Noonan had very STRONG points that I agreed with. This helped me decide that I do believe that the military strike is probably not the best solution. Noonan brought up a good point that no one should question our power as America and no one is because it is very known that we are a strong nation. So that shouldnt be a reason at all for taking the strike. 

Scooped by Hannah Davis
Scoop.it!

The 5 ways that Congress is splitting on Syria

The 5 ways that Congress is splitting on Syria | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
Lawmakers appear to be dividing into at least five camps. Learn about the divisions by reading their own words.
Hannah Davis's insight:

The main issue that I now have with Obama's choice in address during congress is that this issue is taking up valuable time for establishing budgets and other governmental pracedures that help keep this country running. I am not ok with this! Our country comes first and foremost! Pushing aside priorities in congress is not s good plan. Obama needs to step up to the plate and let congress run their plans while he deals wth Syria. 

more...
Abe's curator insight, September 11, 2013 2:05 AM

Seems like there is no clear way to which direction the United States will be headed.

 

Rescooped by Hannah Davis 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 | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
Contradicting President Obama’s assertion, Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas said this morning on “This Week” that the president does not have the authority to order a military strike on Syria without Congressional approval.

Via Teresa Herrin
Hannah Davis's insight:

After listening to Senator Cruz, I believe that he is very correct in saying that it really isn't our buisness. Although Obama has good intentions in ordering an airstrike, he is still getting involved in affairs that he truthfully does not want to be involved in. I agree with Cruz that we should be focusing more on national security, but also we should still keep tabs on Syrian issues. 

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.

Scooped by Hannah Davis
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? | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | 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.
Hannah Davis's insight:

Its very interesting that a Supreme Court Justice is just now expressing their "atheism". This is probably creating a lot of controversy between conservatives who are likely irritated or just dissappointed. Many are probably still upset with the recent ruling about ObamaCare constitutionality. Its quite a revolutionary thing to see justice infomal qualifications changing. 

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 Hannah Davis
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.
Hannah Davis's insight:

Here, the video shows Rick Perry's first trip back to Iowa in the last year and a half. He seems to have supported and enjoyed Texas Senator Ted Cruz's recent filibuster on ObamaCare bill appropriations. He does however admit that it was not a wise idea to call out Mr. Obama. His recent trips back to the Iowa state, meetig with possible supporters and such seems to predict his running in the 2016 election. Hopefully this time Perry won't back out of the running for president again like he did in 2012. If he does, there is little chance that he will gather support to run for other offices. 

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 Hannah Davis 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
Hannah Davis's insight:

This video starts with Obama's announcement of Nate Silver's accurate predition of last year's POTUS election. Two key things that are major focuses of the upcoming mideterm elections are the future plans for ObamaCare and the recently questioned abilities of our government. Silver makes the point that after something is made fun of, that when we as Americans tend to step back and take a closer look, possibly affecting the outcome of the upcoming elections. After an intense discussion of the recent congressional approval rating drop following the government shutdown, the panel focuses more on property rights and such. I think that this conversation took into account a lot of the different factors that are a concern of many American voters when they cast their ballots, and its interesting to see the differing opinions of these people. I wonder who will be right. 

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 Hannah Davis
Scoop.it!

Booker Brings Dash Of Diversity To Still Old, White Senate

Booker Brings Dash Of Diversity To Still Old, White Senate | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
Cory Booker becomes ninth African-American to serve in the Senate, replacing Frank Lautenberg.
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Hannah Davis from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

BY 11/3 -- Secession Movement

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

Via Teresa Herrin
Hannah Davis's insight:

11 counties of Colorado are vying to make their own state so that tehy can get more representation. The rural residents feel that they have no voice in Congress and that urban and suburban areas dominate the votes. Most of these people are red republicans living in blue democratic states. Many say that it won't happen because of the  lack of influence that these people have. 

I think that the state secession could happen because some people want it just that badly. 

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 Hannah Davis
Scoop.it!

1-800-ObamaCare-Denial: Website problems don't matter when your intentions are good.

1-800-ObamaCare-Denial: Website problems don't matter when your intentions are good. | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
The Wall Street Journal on the liberal claim that website problems don't matter when your intentions are good.
Hannah Davis's insight:

So recently, many people have been critical of the intentions of the government when the healthcare website was having difficulties. Now its just causing plans to become more expensive and the policies are not complying with the mandates and everything is just falling apart. The main issue was not the website, it was the failure to address the real problem and to just be completely honest without sugarcoating it like always. 

Even if someone did sabotage the website, the democrats needed to ensure that everyone was still getting the availability to what the website offered. The fact that the phone line redirected the caller back to the website indicates a lack of care for the people in general. The good intentions don't matter if its not going to bring a change or positive outcome because something already screwed up. 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Hannah Davis
Scoop.it!

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

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

This article is mostly about why the author's organization is fighting against obamacare: to protect us from the negative effects of the law. Premiums are going up, and more money is being spent; money that we don't have. Quality of health care will drop, and your choice of doctor will likely be taken away. Obamacare is unstable and harmful to everyone in america. 

 

I think that this article is spot on. Coming from a family with two doctors for parents, I know how Obamacare is affecting their schedules. Longer hours, more patients to see, and they are rushing through the days just trying to get everyone through rather than spending time with the patient like it used to be. The negative effects of this law are too numerous to outweigh the positive effects and I think that Demint is right is saying that this law needs to go. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

Rescooped by Hannah Davis from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

Our Democracy Is at Stake

Our Democracy Is at Stake | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
The future of how we govern ourselves is on the line, and majority rule is still majority rule.

Via Teresa Herrin
Hannah Davis's insight:

How we govern ourselves is a vital bit of knowledge that every american should be aware of. How we are currently doing it doesn't seem to be working because no one can compromise. I feel like the houses of congress are not able to reach a resolution because they are unwilling to make regrettable sacrifices in battle in order to win the war. The unyielding face of the senate right now is further proving just how deep our government will have to go into fixing the source of problem in order to get this resolved, and some things may change pretty dramatically. 

more...
Karlo Remigio's curator insight, October 16, 2013 12:59 AM

This article discusses the issue of Republicans taking hostage the American democracy through the practices of gerrymandering. By cleverly redrawing the line, the author says the have been able to take control of the entire government despite their actual minority; the author likens their stronghold districts to alternate universes that do not represent their districts accurately at all. From my viewpoint, this is an accurate description of the situation in Congress. The chokehold the Republicans have on the government have given them the power to force the Senate and the rest of the government to shutdown over a bill that goes against their principles, despite it being an issue for a only a minority of the American population. Things should be changed in terms of how redistricting should be down so that it more accurately represents the people of the U.S.

Sabika Rehman's curator insight, October 18, 2013 12:18 AM

Our democracy is based on majority rule and if you don't like a policy, you can not shut down the government. Republicans created many safe districts in the 2010 election mostly in white neighborhood. Democracy tells us to accept the decisions of the majority and prepare for the other election

Rabika Rehman's curator insight, October 18, 2013 1:23 AM

when a bill goes through a process it shouldnt be denied by the minority. The shutting down of the government was totally point less and parties should wait for their elected politicians to get their favored bill

Rescooped by Hannah Davis from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

Nightly News: Gerrymandering: the recipe for dysfunctional government?

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

Via Teresa Herrin
Hannah Davis's insight:

Clearly something needs to be changed. The fact that our government has been shut down for two weeks now really shows that our government system just isnt working anymore. The gerrymandering is helping the government to stay the way that it is and people are getting tired of our government not doing anything to fix the source of the problem. 

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

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

2. Gerrymandering allows incumbents to get reelected multiple times. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Scooped by Hannah Davis
Scoop.it!

Everything you need to know about how a government shutdown works

Everything you need to know about how a government shutdown works | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | Scoop.it
Which parts of the government close down, which parts stay open, and how the economy could be affected.
Hannah Davis's insight:

I personally think that the current standoff happening in Congress is completely ridiculous. They are all very educated, reasonable men. Putting the economy and government on the verge of total shutdown will destory the American faith in our government's ability to protect us. We will have a serious crisis on our hands, and some angry americans. 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Hannah Davis
Scoop.it!

Obama Tests Limits of Power in Syrian Conflict

Obama Tests Limits of Power in Syrian Conflict | hacadav_bhs_AP_GOPO | 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.
Hannah Davis's insight:

Like they say how Obama is going where no president has gone before, I think that he shouldn't have to go there. We ave dealt with 2 world wars, terrorist attacks, and other global crisis. An airstike is just not necessary in my opinion. 

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.

Scooped by Hannah Davis
Scoop.it!

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

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

"Al Qaeda's Airforce" was a demeaning term in the statement by Sen. Cruz. Its a generalized term, but still he is correct in saying that anything we do to cause an imbalance of power in Syria will provide Al Qaeda with the necessary advantage to launch new terrorist attacks against the US. I still think that we need to play this game a little smarter than showing off our missiles to Syria. 

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.