Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook
24 views | +0 today
Follow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Rachel Weaver
Scoop.it!

A Decision That Helped Shape Michelle Obama

A Decision That Helped Shape Michelle Obama | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it
For the anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education, Michelle Obama will head to Topeka to talk about a Supreme Court ruling that affected her life.
Rachel Weaver's insight:

Quarter 4, Week 12, May 12-16

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/16/us/a-decision-that-helped-shape-a-first-lady.html?ref=politics&_r=0

 This article talks about Michelle's Obama's feelings on the BROWN V BOARD CASE and how it changed her life. She lived in the SEGREGATED town of Chicago where she went to school with mostly African American students. Even though the CASE had made it so all SCHOOLS WERE SEGREGATED in 1954, most schools still didn't DESEGREGATED until the late 70's early 80's around the time Michelle started going to high school. She that this case helped her be able to go to a diverse high school that gave her a wide range of educational benefits and showed her many different cultures. She is very grateful of the this LANDMARK CASE and the PRECEDENT it set.

 

In our AP GOPO class we talked a lot about the Civil Rights movement with this case being the main component in the fight against racial discrimination. Like Michelle Obama, it affected so many kids throughout the United States in a time when they were being discriminated. In our government class, we talked about precedents and in the Brown v Board case it OVERTURNED THE PRECEDENT of Plessy v Ferguson. It created a new precedent that is still held today and will forever be. This case is one of the most important CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS that were ever brought to court because it shaped America as we know it today and helped to make everyone in this country equal.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rachel Weaver
Scoop.it!

The Government Listens To Lobbyists And The Wealthy, Not You And Me

The Government Listens To Lobbyists And The Wealthy, Not You And Me | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it
New research finds that average citizens have next to no influence on passing public policy.
Rachel Weaver's insight:

Quarter 4, Week 11 April 21- April 27

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/04/12/3426152/wealthy-lobbyists-policy/ ;

This article talks about the power of the wealthy interest groups in government today. A new study shows that the U.S is dominated by the economic elite now. They also say that even if a majority of people agree or disagree on an issue, their opinion usually doesn't matter when the affluent americans and the large interest groups are involved in the decision. They say that the U.S government does not represent the majority of the country's citizens. They also say how the majority of the time senators will only fix problems that pertain to the wealthy and pay little attention to the poor and middle class. 

 

This relates to what we have recently been talking about in our government class. We have been talking about the power of INTEREST GROUPS and which catergory do most fall into. It seems to be that in this article the large and most well known interest groups are run by the WEALTHY AND ELITE. They have become very powerful in making sure that no policy or legislation is made that is not in favor of their interest. Since they are wealthy, they are able to control what the government will do. These large interest groups are probably part of an IRON TRIANGLE as this article implies. The article implies that the government is helping these elite interest groups because they know that they will be finacially supported in return for this support and help. I personally feel that is unfair because our nation is not democratic anymore because even when a majority of people are in favor of certain policies, things still don't get done.

more...
Gabby Huizinga's comment, April 22, 2014 9:07 AM
I agree that iron triangles make our nation unfair. Many interest groups that may not be as wealthy or prestigious work very hard on their legislation only for it to be ignored. Our nation is becoming less democratic because policy is controlled by a select few. I understand that if we voted on every new policy, nothing would get done, but we should be more democratic in creating new policies.
Gabby Huizinga's comment, April 22, 2014 4:51 PM
Aight I'm gonna finish this comment because Mr. Doyle came in when I was writing. So....as I was saying about democratic policy making...I feel like because the policies are so focused on the elitists, most Americans don't understand what the policies include. If the policies focused on the majority of Americans, Americans would be more knowlegable about what is going on in their country. This way, the legislation is also more equal and no single interest group becomes too powerful, promoting pluralism.
Scooped by Rachel Weaver
Scoop.it!

Student News Daily » U.S. Justice Dept. sues Philly school district over beard-length rule » Print

Rachel Weaver's insight:

Quarter 3 Week 8 March 17- March 23

http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/daily-news-article/u-s-justice-dept-sues-philly-school-district-over-beard-length-rule/print/?part=article

This article is about a case involving a man that was not allowed to keep his beard long because of a school policy even though his religion requires him to have a long beard. The man Abu Bakr, had kept his beard untrimmed for 27 years and when the new policy was introduced, he wasn't able to follow through with the new policy. He was denied request for reasonable accomadation to the policy because it was outweighed by the integrity of the policy. This issue address the infringement on his first amendment rights of freedom of religion. The U.S District Court said that the policy should not discriminate toward any one of their employees.

 

This article relates to our government class because right now we are talking about the BILL OF RIGHTS and the RIGHTS associated with each. I think that this infringes on the 1ST AMENDMENT RIGHTS of FREEDOM OF RELIGION. They shouldn't be able to deny his request not to abide by the new policy just because they feel that themselves and their new POLICY is somehow SUPERIOR to the rights of this man. I also think that is unruly to try and give him a warning slip for not following the rules. He can't just give up his religion to be able to work at the job. No place of work should discriminate towards race, gender, age , and even RELIGION.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rachel Weaver
Scoop.it!

'I'm Going To Prison For Working At A Pot Shop That Was Legal In My State'

'I'm Going To Prison For Working At A Pot Shop That Was Legal In My State' | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it
Robert Duncan moved from Los Angeles to Northern California in 2010 to manage marijuana growing operations for a collective of medical marijuana dispensaries. Although California voters legalized medical cannabis more than 17 years ago, the plant rem...
Rachel Weaver's insight:

Quarter 3, Week 6, March 3- March 9

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/03/robert-duncan-marijuana_n_4877072.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

This article is about this man sentenced to 2 years in prison for manufacturing.of marijuana. At the STATE LEVEL he was doing it legally but at the NATIONAL LEVEL, he was not. Even though states can prohibite the use of marijuana, it is still illegal in the NATIONAL GOVERNMENT. The national govt told them that if they complied with all the rules that they would be fine. They also said that they didn't do raids very often. This just happened to be the time. The store owner, the director, and himself were all senteced to prison time. The medical marijuana had been following all the guidlines and in California it is legal so this man is very confused on why he is being sent to prison.

 

In my AP GOPO class, we have been talking about the powers of the FEDERAL AND STATE GOVT and how national government is SUPREME over state in most cases. This is a perfect example of that power. Even though it was a state law, it isn't national law so they can legally arrest these men for selling marijuana. I feel that this unfair because why make a state law if it can just be contradicted by national law? All laws, I think, should be passed both state and nation wide so there is no confusion and what the law states, is what you legally can do. These are the type of debates we have in our class, deciding whether FEDERALISM really is a good way to run a country.

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Rachel Weaver from Wonderful World of History
Scoop.it!

Electoral college reform (fifty states with equal population) – fake is the new real

Electoral college reform (fifty states with equal population) – fake is the new real | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it
proposal to reform the electoral college by reorganizing the US into states of equal sizes

Via Mr. David Burton
Rachel Weaver's insight:

Quarter 3, Week 3, February 3- February 9

http://fakeisthenewreal.org/reform/

This article talks about and shows a new map of America. In every state, there is equal population. They are making new names for the states and counties. This was made as almost like a propsal for how we should run the electoral college. This way, every state would be represented equally and smaller states wouldn't get over represented and large states wouldn't get under represented. The disadvanges are local counties might have a shift in state laws and procedures. This article was made up by a random person, it is not actually real or in effect for this country. Just put out to show maybe a more effecient way of the electoral college that could possibly used in the future.

 

 I think this article was very interesting. The idea of having each state have equal population for equal representation sounds like a good idea. Now I don't know if it would actually work though. It's a pretty drastic change to our country. We are learning about how the electoral college works in our government class. I just learned about how this process works and some of the problems people debate about that make the electoral college such a conserversial issue. This article really talks about the main problems that we face with the electoral college.-- The representation between large and small states. This is the debate for some that our against the electoral college. They want the larger states to be represented just as much as the small states. This map would effectively solve that problem. I like the idea of this happening but I don't think it will happen any time soon.

more...
Mr. David Burton's curator insight, February 15, 2013 6:58 PM

While this was not designed to be an official recomendation to overcome perceived flaws with the Electoral College, it is absolutely something which can get us thinking and talking about a whole host of geography and political issues.

Rescooped by Rachel Weaver from Referendum 2014
Scoop.it!

Scots poll 'may lead to lower voting age': Cameron is warned over concession to SNP leader

Scots poll 'may lead to lower voting age': Cameron is warned over concession to SNP leader | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (pictured) said the precedent would make it ‘impossible’ to prevent youngsters voting in future general elections, and ‘bring politics into our schools’.

Via Peter A Bell
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Rachel Weaver from Miscellaneous Topics
Scoop.it!

Infographic: The Demographics of Social Media Users

Infographic: The Demographics of Social Media Users | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it

Understanding the demographics of social media users is critical to effective, well-targeted social media marketing.

Luckily, a new infographic from DocStoc and the Pew Research Center is bestowing on marketers today a wealth of invaluable information that marketers can use.

From Pinterest’s primary appeal to rural residents, to Instagram’s resounding appeal to urban residents and 18-29 year olds, learn more about the demographics driving today’s top social networks at this graphic.


Via Lauren Moss, David Simpson
more...
Chris Lott's curator insight, August 22, 2013 10:26 AM

No big suprises here, though the LinkedIn percentage is...interesting.

Charlie Dare's curator insight, August 22, 2013 11:05 PM

Which demographic are you dealing with..Pinterest has more rural people Facebook lots of younger women..and so forth no big surprises.LinkedIn of interest growing I,d think ..Instigram never used or tumbler !

Andrew Earnshaw's curator insight, September 20, 2013 3:28 PM

Must admit I don't dabble much with Pinterest, its never seemed Pinteresting to me !! Need to saw at up, I think.

Scooped by Rachel Weaver
Scoop.it!

Harry Reid: 'I Can't Vote For' Obama Nominee Michael Boggs

Harry Reid: 'I Can't Vote For' Obama Nominee Michael Boggs | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it
WASHINGTON -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Wednesday became the first Democratic senator to say he can't support President Barack Obama's judicial nominee Michael Boggs, who has drawn criticism from progressive groups for his record ...
Rachel Weaver's insight:

Quarter 4, Week 12, May 12-  May 16

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/14/harry-reid-michael-boggs_n_5325187.html

This article talks about MAJORITY LEADER OF THE SENATE, Harry Reid, and his opposition to PRESIDENT Obama's JUDICIAL NOMINATION. This is surprising since Reid is a DEMOCRAT and usually supports Obama's decisions since he is from the DEMOCRATIC PARTY as well. Harry Reid does not the like the views that this former Georgia STATE LEGISLATOR has expressed. The nominee, Michael Boggs, is up for a post on the U.S District Court of the Northern District of Georgia. Reid doesn't like that Boggs voted to ban same- sex marriage, voted to keep the confederate insignia  on the state flag, and required that the amount of abortions a doctor has done should be posted online.

 

This is article relates to my AP GOPO class and when we talked about CONGRESS. Usually the majority leader of the senate, since he is a democrat, will vote in favor of everything and everyone that the president nominates since he is a democrat as well. I think this is shocking because having the leader of the senate it would be a beneifit for the president but in this case it's not helping him at all. I wouldn't nominate Boggs either because I don't agree with his views and what he has done on the District Court,

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rachel Weaver
Scoop.it!

Opposition to affirmative action: California Asian Americans have forgotten civil rights history

Opposition to affirmative action: California Asian Americans have forgotten civil rights history | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it
Jenelle Wong of the University of Maryland says the opportunities she and her parents had were only possible because of the long fight for civil rights and political recognition led by black Americans.
Rachel Weaver's insight:

Quarter 4 Week 10 April 7- April 13

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_25442457/opposition-affirmative-action-california-asian-americans-have-forgotten

This article talks about the new opposition of Asian- americans on the topic of AFFIRMATIVE ACTION. They once thought that it helped them have equal opportunity of getting accepted into college but now many of them feel that they are at a disadvantage. They seem to forget that they are actually more advantaged than other minorites and civil rights (like affirmative action) is what brought them to great education advantages. Many asian american supporters feel that the opposers should be grateful for what they have and how they got here in the first place. They shouldn't be blaming affirmative action, they should be thanking it.

 

This relates to my AP GOPO class because we just wrote a paper on affirmative action. In that case, the whites felt that they were being discriminated. In this new issue, the MINORITIES are the ones that feel AFFIRMATIVE ACTION is putting them at a disadvantage. Affirmative action is supposed to help the minorities that are usually disadvataged. In this artice they also talked about CIVIL RIGHTS. We learned just recently about civil rights. The african americans helped pave the way for equality of all the other minorites not just themselves. I feel that the minorites should be supporting affirmative action because it really does help them.

more...
Gabby Huizinga's comment, May 16, 2014 8:44 AM
I disagree with your statement on your support for affirmative action. The way to stop racism is to look at things from an objective point of view and stop talking about race. People rarely talk about religion in the workplace and college admissions, so there's no religious affirmative action. Equality can have a limit. Even though our country was founded on everyone starting from the same place, some people are at more of a disadvantage than others. Due to DEMOGRAPHICS, a majority of these people are minorities. Instead of having the government assist them in getting into college or getting hired, they should work hard to get the skills needed to succeed. Personally, I believe that affirmative action is for lazy people that rely on something they can't control to succeed instead of their skills.
Rescooped by Rachel Weaver from The P2P Daily
Scoop.it!

What Does Twitter’s Country-by-Country Takedown System Mean for Freedom of Expression? | Electronic Frontier Foundation

What Does Twitter’s Country-by-Country Takedown System Mean for Freedom of Expression? | Electronic Frontier Foundation | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it

What does #Twitter's country-by-country takedown system mean for freedom of expression?


Via P2P Foundation
Rachel Weaver's insight:

Quarter 3, Week 7, March 10- March 16

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/what-does-twitter’s-country-country-takedown-system-mean-freedom-expression

This article talks about the new feature that Twitter, the social media website, has just added. What the new feature does is it takes tweets off twitter that are offensive under certain countries laws but only people living in that country are not able to see this. Twitter has always been able to take down offensive material but now it only takes it down for the specific country that has as a law against obscenity. Twitter has always said that they strive to keep Twitter a place for freedom of expression but they also have to comply with every single country's law which can be very difficult. The main reason they put this new feature in is to not take off the tweet for everyone to see because in other countries that tweet might not be violating any rules so it would be unfair not to let those people see it.

 

We just started talking about are CONSTITUITIONAL RIGHTS in my AP GOPO class. The FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION is one of our rights. This article shows that twitter trys to stive for an open place to let you feelings out without judgement but freedom of expression is a privelege only few states get. I just read about OBSCENITY AND CENSORSHIP in my readings and it shows that the U.S doesn't protect obscenity but there is certain things that can be seen approriate enough, like displaying it on the interenet. I think since these tweets are on the interenet, they should be protected as a freedom of speech but obviously that can't always work because different countries have different rights. This new feature is a eye opener to the fact that not every place has the right to free expression which I think should be changed throughout the whole entire world.

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Rachel Weaver from Allen's Arts News
Scoop.it!

Diversify or Die: Why the Art World Needs to Keep Up With Our Changing Society

Diversify or Die: Why the Art World Needs to Keep Up With Our Changing Society | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it
The realities of America's oncoming "majority minority" society, spotlighted by the recent election, have huge implications for the overwhelmingly white art world.

Via Allen Bell
Rachel Weaver's insight:

Quarter 3, Week 4, February 10- February 16

http://www.blouinartinfo.com/news/story/840695/diversify-or-die-why-the-art-world-needs-to-keep-up-with-our

This article talks about the overwhelming low percentage of minorites participating or looking at art in various museums across the country. The minority majority that is affecting the whole nation somehow hasn't made an impact on the art world.  The emerging majority has been a major political issue. The need to diversify every aspect of america is becoming more and more prevalent. Many of the people that are visiting museums or putting their art work on display is non- hispanic whites. It has not really changed since the early 1900's when museums were becoming more popular. This artice is trying to show that we need to diversify the art world because cleary the museums or shops that display the art don't see anything wrong with an all white art world.

 

This relates to our class because we have dicussed a little bit about the minority majority. This is just another aspect of the diversity of this country. There is an overwhelming large amount of hispanics, asians, blacks, etc that are popping up all over the country. They should be able to be more involved in art. If they don't do it themselves, the president should address these issues. This not only relates to what were talking about in class, but it relates to me personally. I take art and I see a lot of diversity in my class. It should be that way for the rest of the country. We need to accept the minority majority and help diversfy our nation.

more...
Gabby Huizinga's comment, February 23, 2014 3:00 PM
I'm surprised that there aren't more minority groups celebrating art. In the years that our school has had our Festival of the Art's celebration, the students that were painting at the celebration were both of minority descent. I don't believe that we can change the statistics. You can't force minority groups to attend art museums or attend art schools. We should focus on celebrating art as a whole, not based on who creates it or who celebrates it. Diversity is a great thing and there is diversity in the art world. Like Rachel said, look at school art classes. There are tons of talented minority students. However, I don't believe that the government should intervene in the art world.
Rescooped by Rachel Weaver from Referendum 2014
Scoop.it!

Government challenged to reduce voting age after it drops opposition to 16-year-olds taking part in Scottish independence referendum

The Government was tonight challenged to lower the voting age across the United Kingdom after it dropped its opposition to 16 year olds taking part in the planned referendum on Scottish independence.

Via Peter A Bell
Rachel Weaver's insight:

Quarter 3, Week 2, January 27- February 2

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/government-challenged-to-reduce-voting-age-after-it-drops-opposition-to-16yearolds-taking-part-in-scottish-independence-referendum-8205851.html

 This article is about the debate against whether 16 years old should be allowed to vote in Scotland. This debate comes after the British Government dropped their oppposion against 16 years voting. They issue was brought up because of Scotland's fight to become an independent country and not part of Britain. Some people think it's a good idea to let more younger people be invovled in government and others think that the many teenagers out there do not really care or want to be invovled in politics at this age.

 

This relates to our class because it's really talking about Political ideology and how it affects each party. Conservatives think this is a bad idea mainly because this age group doesn't vote for them as much as they vote for liberals. Also, they feel most teenagers do not want to participate in goverment elections anyway. While liberals think that it's great that younger generation is taking interest in voting and being an active citizen in government. As we talked about in class, the liberal would be for it because it promotes individual freedom. This really also relates to me, personally, because I am 16 and I think it would be awesome if I could vote now because I like to be involved with the big elections and have my voice matter.

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Rachel Weaver from Geography Education
Scoop.it!

Why Are States So Red and Blue?

Why Are States So Red and Blue? | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it
Theories about our right-wing and left-wing mind-sets don't explain why they are tied to geography.

 

While not endorsing all the cultural assumptions in the article, this is still an interesting exploration into expalining why distinct places are are politically aligned with particular parties. 

 

Questions to ponder: What portions of the author's argument do you agree (or disagree) with?  What do you see as the reasons behind the spatial distributions of "blue" and "red" in the United States? 

 

Tags: political, place, USA, culture, unit 4 political.


Via Seth Dixon
more...
BraydenJulietteGeo's comment, November 21, 2013 1:26 PM
this is a extremely interesting article on how certain portions of our country are know for voting for certain political party's during presidential elections. We have seen this political pattern all through our history, and can now almost always guess what states will be red or blue when it comes time for elections. Because this talks about political party's I have put this under political
Scooped by Rachel Weaver
Scoop.it!

How Cable TV's Ascendancy Explains the Duck Dynasty Culture War

How Cable TV's Ascendancy Explains the Duck Dynasty Culture War | Rachel Weaver's Current Events Scrapbook | Scoop.it
As one of the few cultural languages spoken by most everyone in the U.S., cable TV gives everyone a platform to fight over—for a moment or two
Rachel Weaver's insight:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-12-20/duck-dynasty-as-a-culture-war-rerun-how-cable-tvs-hr-decisions-became-a-battlefield

Quarter 3, Week 1, January 20-26

The article is about the culture war surrounding the show Duck Dynasty. During an interview with GQ Magazine, Phil Robertson made some anti-gay remarks that resulted in him being suspened from the show for just a short amount of time. It talks about how even though he said those remarks, people whether or not agree with his view on certain issues, will still be tuning in to watch the show. The conservatives think that the suspension of Phil is a violation of free speech amendment, while progressives think it is wrong what he said and a violation of civil rights. People are culturually involved in tv so much, and will be even after duck dynasy is over.

 

This really connects with what we are doing in my government class. We have been talking about the culture war between orthodoxs and progressives. This issue is just like that. Its the battle between conservatives view and progressives view on the suspension of Phil for is anti-gay remarks. This really proves that the culture war is happening and it is effecting our whole lives. Politics have become increasingly more prevalent in the media now because of all the new issues we are facing like abortion, same sex marriage, etc. I personally think that what Phil said was not right and even though they suspended him, it still doesn't change people's minds and many people are still going to watch the show.

more...
No comment yet.