Democrats are unhappy that some Americans are getting cancellation notices saying that their current health insurance plan doesn't provide adequate coverage according to the new law. They are even threatening to support an opposing bill to show Americans that they want to keep their word. While I like the idea behind Obamacare, the glitches do need to be worked out and the plan needs to be modified and perfected. I suppose that will come with time.
Obviously, 106,000 enrolled is a very small fraction of those who still need to be enrolled, which is causing disappointment and frustration among Americans & politicians. However, at least the prospect of having affordable healthcare is intact. Most things don't start out perfectly, so with modifications, this plan can still improve over time to become more efficient & effective.
It is pretty inconvenient/inefficient that some states are making same-sex couples go to a federal base to get their ID for benefits. But at the same time I understand where the states doing this are coming from--if it's not in compliance with their state laws it would be breaking their laws to give them the ID. While it seems like an irrational and stupid measure, I have to agree with the states since they should not want to be hypocrites.
It will be interesting to hear how the SC rules on this case. I still think they should replace the prayer with a moment of silence, but I predict that the SC will supress the whole thing by ruling that the prayers stay since there's just so many other more important things going on in the nation right now & we don't need another controversy.
The graphic shows a downwards trend of Obama's approval rating. My opinion is that the American public is way too critical in general of anybody before the public eye, whether it be a politician or a celebrity or the POTUS. Most of the stuff really isn't his fault, just bad luck. This article was pretty pessimistic and biased. Different people see things in different light. I'm guessing a Republican wrote the article...
I agree that Twitter is a great way to reach young people. Most of us read our TL more than we read, or even watch the news. I think Twitter in politics is a good thing because it helps us be more informed and connected to our policymakers.
This was a discussion/debate about various topics. Nate Silver, who predicted the 2012 election well, was present. Some points brought up that I found interesting/accurate: The fact that most Americans don't really take notice of some political issues until it is portrayed in a comedic way such as in SNL or Jay Leno. How abortion is such a strong issue that a Republican who is Pro-Life is expected to win the very blue state of NJ. How some of the recent approval polls may be deceiving since they were taken right after the govt shutdown.
This article was about a new Senator who is African American and relatively young. It also touched on other diversity in the Senate. I'm glad diversity in our government is increasing. Our country is very diverse so the government should reflect that. People of different ages & cultural backgrounds can provide insightful perspective that will help the government reflect the people more. That being said, in the future, I don't think different ethnicities should be such a big deal. Right now, different races have different cultures but in future America it will blend more and we should all be on equal footing instead.
Residents of rural areas feel like their voices aren't being heard (usually Republicans in a largely Democratic state) and want to secede. I understand where they're coming from and how they feel, but I doubt they would have any success with secession. Perhaps their efforts would be better placed in forming or supporting interest groups to raise awareness about their opinions, etc rather than focusing on such an unlikely measure.
I don't agree with this article that the website problems means all of ObamaCare will be a failure. It's more of a technical issue than an issue with the whole plan of the policy. This article was extremely biased and touched on irrelevant problems rather than arguing the actual important, debatable topics.
I think want Rand Paul is doing is admirable and I completely support this amendment. It is hypocritical for members of the government to not have Obamacare, especially when they support it. While it will certainly be difficult to achieve a constitutional amendment, I hope Paul succeeds.
This article with numerous embedded videos was helpful in explaining the different parts of Obamacare. Each state has their own website & can decide for themselves whether they want to expand medicaid. Obamacare does not cancel people's plans if they are already covered. If people aren't covered they will have to pay a penalty tax, but there are exceptions to this mandate.
An anti-Muslim video made in the US incited a desire for protest among French Muslims. France did not allow them to protest. Americans are surprised that the French aren't allowed to protest this and the French and rest of the world are surprised that the US doesn't limit this type of speech. The article compared ways in that the US gives much more freedom of speech than do other countries, even democratic ones. We do not need to limit free speech in America since this would violate our 1st amend rights. If we limited everything that could possibly offend someone, this would be a very silent world. Not limiting speech so much can teach people to have more patience and be more tolerable of the beliefs of others.
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...
Ideally, I would agree with Williams that "if they don't like it, they can just ignore it." It would be different if the pastor were forcing the kids to pray, but he says they can opt out or join in whenever they want. Realistically, this is in a very gray area, so I believe the bus driver should not be praying with the kids--one thing can lead to another and he might become more and more forceful about the praying if it were condoned.
Though it's a bit of a strange practice, I do respect whatever these people believe. However, I don't think using the First Amendment as an excuse to break the law should be alllowed. If it were, people would say "Oh I robbed that bank bc it was for my religion", etc. People should be allowed to freely practice their religion/beliefs, but not when it breaks the law or harms others.
I'm not a Rick Perry fan - if he runs in 2016 I don't think he'll win. I noticed how he tried to dodge the interviewers question about if he thinks Chris Christie is a "true conservative". He probably doesn't think he is, but doesn't want to say it.
I think it's a good thing to have diversity in religion (whether Christian, Jewish, Atheist, etc) on the Supreme Court since it provides different perspectives. I don't they should pray before the legislative meetings since it doesn't include everyone. A simple solution is to just have a few moments of silence where people can do and think whatever they want.
This article compared the two budget committe heads: House Representative Republican Paul Ryan and Democratic Senator Patty Murray. It goes into their personal background as well. To increase saving money their plans are typical for Republicans and Democrats: Ryan goes with spending cuts. Murray goes with increasing taxes.
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.
Basically, no. Email is not private. But the general American does not need to worry about this. The NSA is the one that does the hacking and they are not going to steal your credit card number and go online shopping with it. The general public is not going to be sending secrets that could destroy the world through email, so really, what's the problem?
This video outlines where Obama's approval ratings took a hit. I think people are being too critical of the president and making a bigger deal out of many of the situations than they really should. It's okay to dissaprove of the president because one disagrees with his political stance, but some of the things listed in this video were a bit petty and not really his fault.
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.
It was interesting to see how the NSA can spy on search engines. As far as the sarcastic comment about how we're cannabilizing our Constitutional rights, I disagree. I'm thankful we have the NSA to keep our country safer and if they want to spy on me to do that, then they can go ahead.
This video was about Baker's book about Bush & Cheney's relationship during Bush's presidency. They were close at first, then drifted apart. I thought it was interesting and a nice relief from the nonstop talk about ObamaCare and the government shutdown, etc.
This article basically talks about how Ted Cruz is welcomed home in Texas as a "hero", contrasting people's dissaproval in Congress. I'm not sure I like how this article generalizes Texas as all supporting Ted Cruz and what he's done. The article seems a bit mocking of strong Republican Texans to me, which I also don't like.