Politics
Follow
6 views | +0 today
 
Rescooped by Brian Cohen from News You Can Use - NO PINKSLIME
onto Politics
Scoop.it!

Live Updates: Sen. Cruz’s Filibuster to Defund Obamacare | Heritage Action for America

Live Updates: Sen. Cruz’s Filibuster to Defund Obamacare | Heritage Action for America | Politics | Scoop.it
Heritage Action posts updates from Sen. Ted Cruz’s Filibuster to Defund Obamacare.

Via #BBBundyBlog #NOMORELIES Tom Woods #Activist Award #Scoopiteer >20,000 Sources >250K Connections http://goo.gl/ruHO3Q
Brian Cohen's insight:

I belive that Senator Cruz made the right choice in refuting Obamacare. Whether or not he should have talked for over 22 hours or not is not relevent to me. He brought up some good points such as Obamacare is taking away jobs from people and the government would possibly shut down from funding things such as Obamacare and take away student aid as well as other government economic aids. This affects me as well as my classmates greatly as we apply for colleges and seek financial aid to help pay for our education.

more...
Claire Burrus's curator insight, September 24, 2013 9:10 PM

And Ted Cruz continues to be an idiot!
Apparently the rich doctors' income is more important than the HEALTH of poor Americans.
"the single biggest job killer in America"? Really? 

James Gasper's curator insight, September 25, 2013 8:10 PM
I think that Sen. Ted Cruz made the right decision in speaking about Obamacare and how it "is the single biggest job killer in America" and also bringing up the fact that some people are only working 29 hour weeks while the other time sitting on their butt getting paid by Obamacare really pisses me off. I do not understand why we keep funding imigrants to come and get free healthcare just for living in our country. Also the democrats are willing to shut down the gov't to defend Obamacare and take away Academic aid for college affects me and my peers.

From around the web

Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Brian Cohen from Government and Economics
Scoop.it!

Deal or no deal?

Deal or no deal? | Politics | Scoop.it
IN HIS big annual speech to Congress, Barack Obama made several promises. He pledged to raise the minimum wage for those contracted to the federal government, to...

Via Joel Leagans
Brian Cohen's insight:

It sounds to me like Obama is wanting to make a lot of change to the economy and American society, but it all seems to be empty promises that he has been known for. In his past 4 years as President, Obama has achieved pasing the Affordable Health Care Act and some smaller tasks, but it will be hard for him to make these changes without Congress. The government shutting down was due to to noncooperation between Obama and the legislative branch. I do not believe he will have an easy time without Congress to back him up. That is why I think that these promises such as higher minimum wages will fall through the cracks.

more...
Lauren Friederman's comment, February 16, 11:33 PM
This article uses the American public's reaction to the multitudinous promises to describe the state of the American government. The article describes how the division, empty promises, and inability to get along within the American government has made government shutdowns and dysfunction the norm. Obama's inability to encourage the political parties to work together has been one of his greatest weaknesses. The partisanship which he has either promoted or allowed has torn the government apart resulting in the embarrassing government shutdown over the debt ceiling that occurred last year. No one seems to have faith in the promises that Obama has made. His one major promise, the Affordable Care Act, was not implemented smoothly at all. It makes sense that people would be skeptical of the president's promises after what he has done so far. The question is: Do the American people deserve a president that they can believe in?;
Melissa Aleman's comment, February 17, 4:19 PM
Obama is definitely making some unlikely promises. Its hard to really say where we'll be, but Obama sure is putting a pretty optimistic image in the publics heads. If Obama isnt able to follow through with all these things that are getting Americans so worked up then he sure will be in a lot of trouble. With the tough grid lock we are in, it might be a lot harder than Obama thinks or is giving the impression that it is.
Stephanie Yard's comment, April 3, 10:10 AM
It seems to me that Obama continues to make promises and get the people hyped temporality, but ultimately not carry out his plans. For example, Obama’s healthcare sounds beneficial, yet only a little over 7 million people signed up out of the 314 million people in the US. That’s nothing to brag about. And increasing the minimum wage will increase the income of those who are employed, but also raise the cost to hire unskilled labor and ultimately reduce employment by businesses.
Rescooped by Brian Cohen from Government and Economics
Scoop.it!

Why So Much Anarchy? | RCW

Why So Much Anarchy? | RCW | Politics | Scoop.it

Via Joel Leagans
Brian Cohen's insight:

The author of this article goes in depth as to why there is so much anarchy and instability in the governments of countries all around the world. Whether it is the end of imperialism, religious differences, or the spread of opinions through new technology such as smart phones and other forms of communication, people in these certain countries do not want to follow the rules and regulations of their government. This leads to more controversy and hostility in the countries, and larger nations such as the US and France have to decide whether they should intervene and possibly cause another world war. We all know how Iraq affected the world, and we do not want this to happen again. Therefore, there must be some way to prevent anarchy in these developing nations. That is the million dollar question that everyone wants to know in order to resolve problems such as these.

more...
Jatoriyae DuPree's comment, March 21, 1:36 PM
Without a stable supply of resources and the lack of an institution there is bound to be anarchy. There are many factors that have caused a rise in anarchy. The people have become more informed thanks to the innovation in technology. The lack of stable institution has a left a gaping hole in the country and left room for the power struggle. Religious beliefs have always caused friction between people and can easily insight the urban poor to rebel against "oppressors." You can find the most anarchy in underdeveloped countries that have turned away from progress like Africa and the middle east. Not only do some lack institution but some are so feeble that they can not hop to satisfy the population under their rule.
Jatoriyae DuPree's comment, March 21, 1:45 PM
I give the writer kudos for saying that some of his predictions were wrong. The reason that the United States hasn't fallen into anarchy because we are a country that history smiles on progress and we have a strong institution that protects our basic human rights and economic rights. Many other countries are behind us and are still having civil wars. The people are just becoming educated and with education there is change. But with the rigid force that is a dictatorship or authoritarian government there has to be a violent rebellion to over throw the rule and claim some civility.
nazlia's comment, April 8, 12:49 AM
The countries that do have much anarchy are different starting from the roots when compared to the United States. As he points out, imperialism, colonialism, feeble identities, not institutions. America has always been united by being proud of our nation, culture, etc. We are very diverse but the thought of freedom and justice binds us.
Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | 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
Brian Cohen's insight:

I think it's interesting to see that the split of republicans and democrats caused the government shutdown over topics such as obamacare. However, now democrats are realizing that if the website doesn't get fixed, they have no choice but to abandon the presidents plan for affordable health care. I think it's great that they are threatening to oppose the plan because it shows me that they are really thinking of the well being of the American people. 

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, 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, 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 Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | 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
Brian Cohen's insight:

It's not right how little of numbers are being produced when it comes to people signing up online for Obamacare. There are so many problems with the website right now that Americans are starting to worry about the affordable healthcare act. I think that the government needs to focus solely on fixing the website and trying to help citizens keep their own insurance plan if they wish. I'm starting to get real irritated with hearing about all the problems of Obamacare these days. 

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, 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, 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 Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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] | Politics | 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
Brian Cohen's insight:

This article relates the supreme court case that is being decided in the next few months on whether it is constitutional to open a legs slating meeting with a prayer. If the court refers to precedent then the prayers are constitutional due to a prior ruling. I don't see anything wrong with praying before a meeting, and i think if someone was really opposed to the idea, they would excuse themselves from the meeting while it is occurring. It's been going on for years and I don't see why anything needs to change. 

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, 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".

Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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.

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

I think twitter has impacted the government in many ways. I think more positively than negatively because it allows Americans the chance to not only see what is happens at that instant, bu it is also letting them get involved in politics. I certainly don't believe it is hurting politics very much. 

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, 10:06 PM

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

Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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!) | Politics | Scoop.it
In the 12 months since his reelection, the president has achieved far less than he expected and suffered one mishap after another.

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

This article touches on Obama's tough first year of his second term. He has dealt with so many problems in the past year, what will happen in the next 3? There was government shutdown, Obamacare problems, sandy houk shooting, Syria, and much more. The second term so far has not fared well for the president and it doesn't look to be getting any easier. 

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, 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, 8:09 PM
I think that Obama was not expecting all these setbacks. He set high goals for himself and he was determined to carry them out. Things have not gone as planned for Obama and his polls have gone down. In the video the guy said "the obamacare website is one month old and still like all one month old it is still shitting its pants" so that speaks for itself and how obama is doing.
Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | 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
Brian Cohen's insight:

I don't think it's right that the bus driver got fired over praying on the bus in front of school children. The driver meant no harm and just wanted to ensure safe travels to the school. He gave the children and their parents the chance to speak up if they did not agree with the praying. It's not like he forced every child to pray. 

more...
Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 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, 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, 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 Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | 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.

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

I would rather have my emails kept between me an the person that I am emailing. Though I have nothing to hide, I dont want anyone snooping around my email seeing my information. I'm sure glad google and yahoo have such an intense and elaborate security system. 

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, 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, 11:53 PM

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

Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | Scoop.it
Cory Booker becomes ninth African-American to serve in the Senate, replacing Frank Lautenberg.

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

I think it's a good idea to add diversity to the Senate and House. I honestly do not think that it is a huge deal that a black person was elected to the Senate. I understand that not many blacks have been elected to the Senate, but with the diversity and increasing population of the US, it was about time that Congress became as diverse as this country. I did find all of those numbers and facts that broke down Congress very interesting and I learned a lot from that breakdown. It's good to see that our representatives are reflecting our people more and more. 

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, 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, 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 Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
Scoop.it!

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

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

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

Through this diagram, I understand more of how the NSA is hacking into Google and Yahoo servers. This is by no means right and like the person in the comment said, this is taking away our constitutional rights, which in return means that Al Quida has won. Their goal is to throw off the American government and cause confusion and corruption through the entire country. The NSA is making this easier for them because I'm sure there are plenty of Americans that feel stripped of their right given to them. The surprising thing to me, though, is the fact that the NSA has to keep everything a secret and have to "break in" in order to gain the information needed. I'm not saying that Google or yahoo wouldve just giveN them access to the servers, but an agreement could've been reached. 

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, 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, 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.
Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
Scoop.it!

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

BY 10/31-- Sebelius apologizes for healthcare website debacle | Politics | Scoop.it
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

This video talks about secretary Sebelius who was in charge of the Obamacare website that has clearly not helped in any way at all. President Obama is so adament about getting all Americans affordable health care, but they can't get it unless the website and the personnel working on Obamacare work together to get it complete. People talk about how the Republicans are to blame for everything that's happened the past couple weeks, but they were trying to prevent this kinds of things from happening in the first place.

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, 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, 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.
Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | 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.

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

Rand Paul is a very smart and courageous person to me right now. I fully support the introduction of his amendment to put policies on members of the federal government if the same thing is being done to citizens without their full consent. This way if Obamacare is passed in Congress, not only will all citizens be required to have health care, but so will the people that put the policy in place. This includes President Obama who is so adament about getting this bill passed as well as the Supreme Court Justice that has caused Obamacare to remain a possibility after he changed his vote on whether it was constitutional. This potential amendment would also help relieve a burden on Republicans who oppose Affordable Health Care.

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, 11:54 PM

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

Rescooped by Brian Cohen from Government and Economics
Scoop.it!

Eight things ‘Downton Abbey’ can teach us about the modern economy

Eight things ‘Downton Abbey’ can teach us about the modern economy | Politics | Scoop.it
The British TV drama is paying homage to economic forces that apply just as neatly to the 21st century world.

Via Joel Leagans
Brian Cohen's insight:

I have not personally seen this show, but my parents watch it and they love it. I like it when tv shows and movies have other meanings to them and teach life lessons to their audiences. In this case, Downton Abbey shows us the ways in which a modern economy works. In the article, the author stresses the fact that new technology requires adaptation, and if one is unable to adapt to the new innovations, they can slip down the social and economic ladder. This is becuase new technology reflects an increase in production, which improves our economy and show how it works. Also, I did not realize the importance of the estate tax on people. The article also greatly emphasizes the importance of investing in your company and treating your workers well so that you can receive the most bang for your buck.

more...
Timothy Shields's comment, April 1, 8:20 PM
I have personally never seen this show but i think it is so special and amazing how shows can portray a deeper meaning within it with this show it displays the message of econimcs in the show in i like how it shows the comparison of how economics was spwcial in 1900s and pretty much being used in the same way also it shows the influence of new technology not only how it can affect your life but also how it affects the economy in the U.S BY IMPROVING IT FOR THE BETTER
rachel's comment, April 7, 10:26 AM
The article dicusses the econimic themes which affect Downton Abbey. Set in the early 1900s, Downton Abbey and it's characters are not isolated from the econimic times. And while it is a fictional family, the econic problems they face are realistic of their times. Many of their problems such as ms.Padmore's aversion to the new technology reveal a parallel to the consistant problem of keeping up with the ever changing times. Also the issuers which Lord Grantam faces as to managing the large estate show a paraelle between the fictional story line and the econmic problems which stay fairly constant throughout the deacades. The show shines a light upon the affects of the econmy which is similar to the problems which today we face in the 21st century.
Lauren Friederman's comment, April 7, 9:44 PM
I find this article fascinating in that it draws so many parallels between 20th century Britain and present-day America. The article makes many relevant points. It states that workers must adapt to technological changes, or risk being left behind. The example from the show is the invention of the beater. Structural unemployment in America is on the rise. The level of technology is increasing faster than the number of workers who are educated on the uses of the new technology. It is important to invest in the company you create as this ensures you a long term financial return. If you sucked the company dry, then there would the return would be much less in the long run. This article suggests that treating employees well is timeless. Loyal employees are likely to do better work, that hasn't changed in a century and it isn't likely to in the future. The coolest thing about this article is that it illustrates how timeless economics are. The principles of economics in the 1900s are much the same principles which govern economics today. This shows that economics consists of a series of rational decisions based upon certain principles which have persisted since the dawn of civilization. Recently, we have over complicated these decisions with the broken American political system. If we could just get back to basic economics, we could begin to fix the economy.
Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | Scoop.it
While even highly offensive speech is protected in the U.S., that level of freedom is quite unique.

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

This article tells of how people in other countries are being limited on their right to speak freely. The governments in these countries are not allowing for free speech, and they are shocked to hear that Americans have that right. Likewise, Americans are greatly surprised by the fact that in other countries, not everyone's voice is heard. There is a reason why we have free speech in America. The government is built around the people and their opinions. How can we guarantee a government made by the people if we limit free speech? I believe that Americans should not be limited on their free speech. However, people also need to think of all the angles and consider discretion sometimes before they speak their opinions. If there was a limitation on free speech, it would certainly violate the 1st amendment because people aren't able to speak their minds. Let the people speak and if they make a fool of themselves or want to voice their thoughts, it's on them. 

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, 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 Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | 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
Brian Cohen's insight:

Through  this article, I have learned more about Obamacare. I think it is a good idea in theory, but so far it has not worked well in practice. The website is not working and I think that a small fine won't stop anyone from not signing up for insurance. People will ultimately do what they want with this. 

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, 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, 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 Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | 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
Brian Cohen's insight:

This article tells us of a pastor that was breaking the law by bringing poisonous snakes into his church. Though he is pleading that it is within his first amendment rights, he most likely will not win because people's safety was in jeopardy and he can't persuade judges that that was an acceptable way to practice his religion. I think that he did go out of line, but I also think it is within his 1st amenment rights. 

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, 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, 11:18 PM

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

Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | 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
Brian Cohen's insight:

This article refers to 6 states that refused to offer the same maritial benefits to homosexual couples as heterosexual couples receive when a splice is in the service. The  defense secretary ordered the states to recognize those people, but the states so far have refused. I think it's great that states like Texas are fighting for what they believe in and aren't crumbling at the hands of the federal government. However, I think that if these people are willing to give their service to their country, their spouces should also receive benefits along with straight spouces. 

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, 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, 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 Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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.

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

This video talks about rick perry preparing for the presidential campaign in 2016. I honestly do not believe he will win the Republican Party nomination, let alone the presidency. People will not forget his blunder from last year, and I do not personally believe he has done much to help Texas as he has been governor. I am still unsure of my opinion on his statement of a conservative in one state is different from one in another state. 

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, 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 Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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? | Politics | 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.

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

This article talks about justice Breyer possibly being atheist and not claiming a faith to believe in. This is after the constitutionality of legislators praying during meetings was questioned. I believe that the justices have the right to practice any faith, if any, and do so privately. Not everyone needs to know their religious preferences. Also I think that praying in a legislative meeting is fine as long as each party I'd given the chance to join in or to leave the meeting temporarily. 

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, 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, 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. 

Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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
Brian Cohen's insight:

I found this video to be very interesting and intriguing. Nate Silver nailed the 2012 election and is now giving his insight on the midterm election coming up in 2014. I found it interesting how they broke down the government and the impacts of these events on future elections and whether there will be a majority republican or democrats in congress. It sounds to me that republicans are starting to fall off the table a bit in election polls. I hope that they can bounce back because I believe in their core valies and morals than those of the democrats. 

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, 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.

Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | Scoop.it
Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray are likely to at least set a friendly tone during budget talks.

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

This article intrigued me very much because it shows that the government is working on trying to stabilize the budget spending. It is good to hear that Paul Ryan and Patty Murray are on the same page and will work together to settle an agreement to lower the national debt. This shows that both parties are willing to compromise and are thinking of ways to help the national government. I think it is also good to know that both have backgrounds in law to help them make the process run smoothly. 

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, 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, 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. 

Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
Scoop.it!

BY 11/3 -- Secession Movement

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

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

I think it is very surprising and yet forseen that counties in different states are thinking of secession. In theory, it is a good idea for our government if new states were added because that would provide more representation to people that have not yet had their voices heard. However, in practice, the idea will never happen because Senators will not want to vote for secession in order to benefit the opposing party. I think that these counties should be considered for forming a new state, but I don't think it will ever happen. 

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, 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, 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.
Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | Scoop.it
Agency positioned itself to collect from among millions of accounts, many belonging to Americans.

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

The article explains the processes taken by the NSA to infiltrate information from Google and Yahoo. Though I support the fact that this is a good way to track terrorism and threats to the United States, I feel that the government is lately snooping and butting their nose in our business. Though it may be for good intentions, the American people should know to some degree what the government is doing. I have nothing to hide, but I feel stripped as a citizen of the United States from the right to send a text, call someone, or send an email without someone other than the intended recipient reading through my stuff. 

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, 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, 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.
Rescooped by Brian Cohen from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
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 | Politics | Scoop.it
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams

Via Teresa Herrin
Brian Cohen's insight:

This video clearly shows that the American people are not happy about the leadership and activities that are occuring in the White House as well as Congress. President Obama has declined in status when seen by the people of the US. The last few weeks have not helped him to try to win back the opinions of the people. These events include the government shutdown, problems with the NSA, and most importantly the issue of universal health care. Congress has also lost footing ever since the shutdown as people now are considering new representatives come next election.

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, 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, 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.