Sammy Masri's BHS...
Follow
9 views | +0 today
 
Rescooped by Sammy Masri from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
onto Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government
Scoop.it!

Obama Tests Limits of Power in Syrian Conflict

Obama Tests Limits of Power in Syrian Conflict | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
President Obama’s approach to Syria is likely to create an important precedent in the often murky legal question of when presidents or nations may lawfully use military force.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

I think Obama was facing all of this superficial, but ever-growing, pressure to do something about Syria, ANYTHING, as long as he just didn't sit idly by. Then, when he finally chose his only viable path (at the time), most people balked at the severity. Iraq and Afghanistan linger more than Kuwait, Kosovo, and Libya. Saving face became the only possible measure afterwards, and forget the actual politics, weapons, and lives at stake.

My personal opinion, of course.

more...
Jessica Lartigue's curator insight, September 11, 2013 7:00 AM

Obama keeps saying it is important to carry out this attack because of important national interests. But why? What interests?...

Tianna Kelly's curator insight, September 11, 2013 1:23 PM

I don't understand President Obama's statement that we must attack Syria because of U.S. national interests. What interests are these? Also, while Obama does legally have the right to launch a military attack on Syria without Congressional approval, the fact that public opinion says that we should not intervene, and that the U.S. is a supposed Democratic country, mean that he should not take it upon himself to act outside of public and Congressional approval. Otherwise, how is he any better than Assad?

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 18, 2014 12:31 PM

Events like this happen in hundreds of different countries yet the US has never gotten involved. Also, the law against chemical weapons is international, therefore, the United Nations should be dealing with this, not the US alone. Of course, the UN would never go for it seeing as how Russia is an ally of the Syrian government. more importantly the situation is lose, lose. We do not need to be involved in this fight, it's not ours.

Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
While even highly offensive speech is protected in the U.S., that level of freedom is quite unique.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

This article mostly consisted of excerpts from an interview given by Noah Feldman, who is a professor of international law at Harvard. He argues that America values free speech much more than other countries because it does not find the state more important than the people.

 

Feldman does make a rather interesting case, but it is a problem of protecting my rights when violated by yours. If there was a way to ensure everyone's contentment, then free speech would be an empty gesture. However...there should be exceptions to his case. It's all great and easy being in the US, where there was relatively little backlash. Being in a place such as Jordan, the issue is magnified greatly. More so, siding with America on past issues means I was even more of a target. Thus, despite claiming pure free speech, Sam Bacile (or whatever his true name ended up being)  could be prosecuted under the clear and present danger test. Certainly he knew there would be serious ramifications, and dozens of people died - being indirectly murdered by Mr. Bacile. The same thought process can be applied to Terry "Harley" Jones, the Floridian pastor who probably has the same type of disinformation about Muslims.

 

As to placing restrictions on free speech and the First Amendment, I feel that too much restriction would disable the entire premise of free speech as well. My balance would be to extend the clear and present danger test to simply clear danger. Present danger could be argued to an infinetismal amount of time, and so just making it inciteful at all, ever, would allow prosecution of such bigots and violence stokers.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:52 PM

Although many nations around the world are democracies, the U.S is unique because it gives its people more personal freedom. The U.S. isn't conscerned with other people getting offended, as long as each person has the right to expression it is okay. The only ban that we have on this is clear and present danger. There are certain guidlines that have developed in order to rule an action potentially dangerous or not. Other countries are astounded by this practice.

Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:38 PM

No protections for those that shrieks obscenities and the clause to discern speeches that invokes clear and present danger are there. This just lacks bold enforcement. Governments are scared of crazy Americans' revolts and teachers fear students. Of course the rest of the world looks down on us. We lack culture, sophistication and moderation.

 

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:32 PM

This article talks about how France prohibited people from talking about prophet mohammad and how although they are a democratic country free speech is not as open as it is in the US over there are stricter rules. I think one of the great things about America is the freedom to make your own choices and speak up and how you are aloud to say what you want. People who have problems with the government are aloud to voice there opinions here it would be against the 1st amendment to limit free speech. Obviously there are offensive things people should not say but we are aloud to voice our opinions when and how we want. 

Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
Of the 106,000 enrollees, only about 27,000 were able to sign up through the federal health-insurance site.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

The Washington Post takes the initial enrollment numbers of the ACA and puts as negative a spin as it can manage, taking note of the massive discrepancy between the forecast and the actual numbers of the Federal website.

 

In the midst of such anger towards what should have really been embraced by everyone, I would like to make the case that, had states, particuarly Republican ones, focused more on creating their own exchanges, or even just accepting the Medicare expansion, then we would not be in this mess today. Besides, nobody likes new things; the mantra of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is so ingrained that we fail to recognize when something truly is broken. Once the benefits begin to show, only then will people actually begin to start signing up in droves.

Oh, and insurance companies are the greediest loansharks on the planet.

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:22 PM

The figures are not up to what was predicted because the people lose trust in such a brittle plan. Its new, disorganized and made with haste, those who signed up stopped midway because they were informed of its problems or because they thought about how the elites' not getting proper pay might trickle down to their jobs.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:26 PM

This article talks about the 106,000 people that enrolled inObama's health insurance in just the first month. That number was way lower than the predictions they had made. It also talks about attempts to pass laws that allow people to keep their old health polices. Its honestly not that shocking that people wouldn't jump to join the new healthcare plan.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 10:22 PM
I think that obviously Obama and his administration had i hopes and expectations for the health care and it was not as successful as they would have liked it to be in the beginning. I think that the website having difficulties and congress not complying is making it a lot harder and not going over as smoothly as planned.
Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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] | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
The U.S. Supreme Court heard argument Wednesday on the constitutionality of opening government meetings with prayer, but the justices seemed unsure how to rule.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

The Supreme Court is hearing a case on whether or not prayers before government meetings is allowed. Most of the judges are Christian, the prayers are Christian, the defendant in Christian, and the challenger is an atheist. Lots of discomfort erupts.

 

Ahh, more religion and state. My decision still stands. There's really no point in having the First Amendment unless we allow everyone to enjoy their religion without others intruding. If one holds the belief of atheism, they should not be forced to listen to religious prayers, Christian or otherwise. The sooner we realize that the most effective government is essentially atheist, the better.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:45 PM

The case won't be settled anytime soon due to that covers  controversial issues between the First Amendment rights of freedom of religion and speech, and the separation of church and state. It will be interesting to see where Anthony Kennedy's vote goes toward on this case.

Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:17 PM

I can't understand this government's "endorsement of religion". Does the free excercise clause only pertain to prohibition of enacting a single religion? Does it exclude the right to be proud of having a religion? Would it be distasteful if a teacher wear a rosary? As long as a religion is not enforced upon the unsastisfied individual, then let the government and its civil servants be humans with religions (practice as they so choose to).

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 1:29 PM

This article talks about prayers being said in a court room. I don't see why this is such a controversy, let people be and pray if they want to. Yes I get the separation of church and state thing, but this really doesnt affect the "state".

Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
A LaFollette pastor headed to court next week for having dozens of poisonous snakes at his church said the laws he allegedly violated in Tennessee infringe on his freedom of religion.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

This is about a pastor who allegedly uses the power of poisonous snake handling to exemplify the power of God. He is now being sent to court over it, as a result of illegally posessing dangerous animals. Again, he claims that the First Amendment grants him full freedom to practise his religion.

 

Freedom of religion - good. Freedom of religion through inherently, deliberately dangerous tasks - err...not so good. Put simply the government - and people who support the government - believe that people should not be freely allowed to harm themselves without some help. For example, we have seatbelts in cars, and warning labels on cigarette packs. Leaving a group of people near a group of, in all probability - very annoyed, poisonous snakes iis a recipe for disaster.

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 3:54 PM

Religious or not. Law or not. Who cares?! If people's lives are clearly at risk, why are such practices disputable? It's apparent that if people are not professional at handling dangerous animals, do not do so. Period. Why is the government dragged into this? and why is this stupid minister leading a blind crowd?

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 12:55 PM

This article talks about a Pastor who has to go to court because he had poisonous snakes at his church during service; however some may say that this violates one's freedon of practicing religion. In court he justifies his act with the 1st Amendment. 

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 11:18 PM

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

Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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
Sammy Masri's insight:

The collection of political commenters - and Mr. Nate Silver - try to decide where the power and advantage lies between the two parties, and how it will affect the 2014 elections. 

 

I do love some essentially pointless political commentary, and the reason why I dismiss this discussion so readily is that there is almost exactly an entire year between now and 2014 Election Day. People will forget about what's happening now and think of the current issues at hand. Of course, if either party somehow extends the ruin that the Obamacare rollout and government shutdown are imparting, then maybe the effects might be felt. Something that will happen, however, is that neither party has a version of "we benefitted the country by -", so I expect a lot of repetition, smear attacks, pandering to extremes and radicals, and general chaos in the midterms next year.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
Cory Booker becomes ninth African-American to serve in the Senate, replacing Frank Lautenberg.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

NPR delves into the history books upon the entry of Booker into the Senate, and looks at demographics of minorities and women in the Capitol.

 

While it would be nice to think of Booker as just another Senator, modern society has forced us to give him his own label: that black Senator who came after Obama. If we really wanted his election to the Senate to stand out, we wouldn't take any special heed at all. This goes for women, Hispanics, Muslims, minorities of all kinds and sorts.

Oh, and lets lower the Senate age requirement to 25.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:30 PM

The electio of Senator Cory Booker will add some diversity to the Senate because he is a a relatively young African American. Most of the Senate consists of old white people. This trend is starting to change a little, especially the Democratic side. A more diverse Congress will be able to better address the concerns of different groups of people.This is reflecting the nation a little bit more, the diversity of this nation.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 28, 2014 4:07 PM

This article talks about the young and new african-american senator and the diversity in the senate. With our country being as diverse as it is, so should our government. That would lead to a better represented population.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 8:05 PM
I think it is good for congress e to be diverse and have different ethinicities, different genders, different ages, and different parties. When passing bills and making decisions you will get a diverse group of opinions making it better for the people
Rescooped by Sammy Masri from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
Scoop.it!

BY 11/3 -- Secession Movement

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

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

This NPR article talks about the idea of secession, and how it has spread in recent times.

 

Everyone wants their voice to be heard, and it cannot be refuted that many rural populations - especially those in Democratic states - have lost their voice at urban migration continues. But there is an easier method to redrawing state borders and shuffling the US Capitol. If the political parties would agree, then every state could adopt something similar to Nebraska or Maine. In doing so, those in rural areas could have their own voice, and a vote in the House. Of course, they probably wouldn't get a Senate seat, but you can't have everything in a democracy.

more...
Melissa Aleman's curator insight, December 20, 2013 3:12 PM

This article talks about citizens, counties, and groups in general in certain states claiming that they want to secede from their state and make a new one. The main group that seems to have a problem is the Republicans living in a Democratic region. For example in Colorado, a vote is going tobe held for secession. I  think that if people have problems with beliefs and the way things work in a certain state, that they should leave. You cant change the whole state to meet all of your standards.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 28, 2014 3:29 PM

The article says that many counties's rural residents  are feeling the need secede and create a new state. Northern counties want to create their own state because they don't agree with the rest of colorado. While the creation of a new state seems a bit extreme, I feel like these residents need to be better represented to avoid ideas like secession. 

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 8:00 PM
I think this is simple if you don't like where you live move. It would be completely outrageous to secede and create another state let alone new gvt. The economy would fail and it would be a mess.
Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
Agency positioned itself to collect from among millions of accounts, many belonging to Americans.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

Lots of things happening in this one article. Of course, taking a jab at the NSA is present, but within that category there is a stolen picture illustrating the process, the history of spying, and the loopholes that the NSA squirms through.

 

I hate to trash the same place so consistently, but...come on. By bringing the slideshow picture, you reversed on your previous article, and cheapened your credibility by purporting that a governmental presentation on the spying and theft of the nation's information has, of all things, a smiley face. Add to that the misdefinition of metadata, and everything falls apart.

Moving onto the actual information, they do do a reasonably accurate history of how the NSA has functioned, and how they walk the thin line between preventative and illegal. The Foreign Intelligence Security Act is one such loophole, allowing spying on American citizens if suspected of being tied with foreign threats. But even this information is littered with opinionated jabs and unsubstantiated claims. If sensationalism was the only way to function, BBC News would have ended a long time ago.

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

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

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

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

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 7:55 PM
I think that it is good for us to know what the government is doing but also it makes the USA look weak if one of our own is going and publishing private information that is vital to the security of the US. I think that on the otherhand i do not really want to know all of the spying that the government is doing i would rather not know if the gvt feels the need to infiltrate yahoo and goodle for information that they think could potentially harm the US then go ahead and do it but i think that again citizens have the rights to privacy and Snowden did a very couragous thing by standing up for the rights of the US citizens.
Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
The NSA, working with its British counterpart, the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), secretly taps into the internal networks of Yahoo and Google, the two biggest Internet companies by overall data traffic.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

This article by the Washington Post takes aim at the NSA spying habits, and illustrates - or believes it does - how the NSA goes about collecting all of our data.

 

While I do believe in privacy and such, being deliberately misleading and going against your own words - in the same article, no less - is a ridiculous practice. For one thing, I'm somewhat glad that most people still have no idea how the NSA actually spies on us, because most people includes those with ill intent in mind. And besides, Google has a disclaimer in its terms and policies that allows it to freely browse through your "secure" e-mails. So pack it in and think of how many terrorist attacks may have been foiled due to such spying.

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

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

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

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

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

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

The Washington Post describes the return of Ted Cruz to Texas, then delves into how he radically changed Texan politics to a much more conservative focus.

I am a critic of the Republican Party, by and large, and the Tea Party is always an easy target. But as much as it pains me to say it, Cruz seems perfectly tailored to current Texan politics. The government shutdown probably didn't affect Texas that much, and many actually praise his efforts against the big, bad government. Of course, the radicalization of conservatism often leads to the national public shunning you. Romney certainly found that out, and the same is happening to Cruz in national polls. Perhaps a cure for him would be to spend more time out of ultra-conservative Texas, and tour the country that he brought to a halt, and see what people think of him then.

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

Rescooped by Sammy Masri from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
Scoop.it!

BY 10/22 or 10/23 -- 1-800-ObamaCare-Denial: Website problems don't matter when your intentions are good.

BY 10/22 or 10/23 -- 1-800-ObamaCare-Denial: Website problems don't matter when your intentions are good. | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
The Wall Street Journal on the liberal claim that website problems don't matter when your intentions are good.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

The Wall Street Journal launches a rather critical piece regarding the handling of the Healthcare.gov launch wreck, especially the reaction and the response by Obama.

 

Now, I'm all for opinion pieces; where would we develop our own if not by reading the others? But this was not an opinion piece. And yet it repeatedly lashes out at liberals, Obama, the government, and anybody generally supportive of Obamacare. Yes, there are some serious issues with the website right now, and something so vital and important to the American people should be fixed ASAP, if not needing to be fixed in the first place. But, when you lace your argument with vitriolic attacks, your message gets weakened somewhat. People who would have normally payed attention stop listening and dismiss you as another jumped-up conservative.

more...
Rabika Rehman's curator insight, October 24, 2013 10:37 PM

Obama thinks that the afordable care act is more than just a website.This reform is upsetting insurance company,they are already making changes with their individual policies because they are non-complaint with the obama care. The fact that it's more than a website should scare people.

Maddy Folkerts's curator insight, October 25, 2013 9:21 PM

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.

Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 7:47 PM

Obama encourages people to apply for benefits over phone. The article itself is very discriminating and has a very derogetory tone. ObamaCare's real goal is to focus over health care. The disadvantage of ObamaCare is that the enrolled people will mainly be the most expensive patients. Even in the video, obama says that the website is slow and there are problems, but the intentions are good. Some people are going to be paying higher prices than they usually do.

Rescooped by Sammy Masri from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
Scoop.it!

BY 10/20 -- It’s Not Just Political Districts. Our News Is Gerrymandered, Too.

The government shutdown reflects a political system that reinforces extremism. The news media system isn’t much different lately.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

A relatively safe article, the author delves into how much of our news is politically charged. Banging more on the general populace than any single organization, the only harsh shot was at Fox News' description of the government shutdown.

 

I'm sorry, but this didn't exactly seem earth-shattering to me. I mean, Fox has always been synonymous with conservative in my mind, as does MSNBC, etc. The only shocking  information was that a Supreme Court judge - one of the most important figures in the country - is clearly and unabashedly opposed to viewpoints other than his own. Heck, even if I was such a closed-minded person, I wouldn't admit it in public. Come on, show some restraint.

more...
Tianna Kelly's curator insight, October 24, 2013 5:54 PM

Gerrymandering is the inherently unfair and immoral practice of politicians of reshaping political district so as to give a particular political party the upper hand. According to this article, news media is engaged in the same unfair practices. News is altered and changed to fir the interests of a certain political leaning. Media outlets choose what images and stories to share with the public so as to shape public opinion to fit its own cause. This is an age-old practice, with most people believing that media outlets are generally liberally slanted. 

Chris Buenaseda's curator insight, November 4, 2013 5:03 PM

The article states how the media is bias much like a gerrymandered district. The media outlets portray different idoelogies and thus, they provide totally different point of views. Having these different media outlets gives  people different sides of different stories and to an extent, it is good to have different sides because it makes people more aware of who is spilling the facts or spreading just pure bullshit, much like Fox News delivers their broadcast every night.

Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 6:27 PM

I think that this article is very accurate. People may think they are branching out or exploring new horizons when they search the web and read the news. Search engines actually change and might guide us to only articles of certain viewpoints.  In essence, people don't receive the wide scope of information they think they are receiving because the information we intake is often filtered to fit our needs. 

Rescooped by Sammy Masri from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
Scoop.it!

BY 10/15 -- Gerrymandering: the recipe for dysfunctional government?

BY 10/15 -- Gerrymandering: the recipe for dysfunctional government? | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it

Video on msnbc.com: The age-old practice of politicians re-drawing Congressional districts to find friendly voters, or, gerrymandering, has allowed members of the House of Representatives from both sides of the aisle to stay in power regardless of...


Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

The video essentially talks about what we discussed in class, and what was in the article on gerrrymandering.

 

Perhaps the most stunning two numbers were the approval rating of Congress in 2012 (15%), and the re-election of representatives (90%!). How do those two add up? Even with gerrymandering, why is there such a broad misrepresentation of the American people? More to the point, what morons don't like a candidate, yet still vote for him/her? What could they possibly gain, apart from strife, mayhem, and misery? What really should be done is an overhaul of gerrymandering. Perhaps a law restricting deliberate partisan line-drawing...oh, hold the phone, I just remembered. The very group that is able to create and pass laws is the same group that causes and benefits from gerrymandering! It is this special immunity that has allowed gerrymandering to reach such toxic levels. If at all possible, there should be a civil suit from regular citizens against Congress, with the trial going to the Supreme Court. Of course, what's one -or even a few- average American citizen(s) against the nation's political elite? 

 

Ok, rant over. Tea and crumpets at 4:30 next Tuesday?

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

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

2. Gerrymandering allows incumbents to get reelected multiple times. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
Congressional Democrats are increasingly expressing support for allowing Americans to retain the insurance coverage they are losing because of the Affordable Care Act.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

There is no denying that the ACA needs some sort of repair work. This article looks at the different fixes that Congress has offered, from both sides of the aisle and sides of the Capitol.

 

While I do think that we need to fix that which has faltered, I think that the slant Republicans are trying to take is useless and futile. Their chief argument seems to be: "Look, Obamacare is awful, it needs to go away, instead we need to...look, Obamacare is awful!" The sole reason why Republicans are not getting as big a boost as they should be getting is down to the lack of an alternative for fixing medical insurance - another undeniably broken system that will only lead to mroe and more strife if left unchecked.

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:33 PM

Enrollment is low for the Affordable Healthcare and Demos are planning to ditch Obama. His top aides suggested cancellation but maybe Obama is saving face, he doesn't think the plan will dry up...oh but it might just will.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:53 PM

This article talks about how Obamacare is doing lots of things it said it wouldn't, like getting rid of American's insurance coverage when the president said they would keep it. Democrats and republican's are agreeing with each other on not making american's keep the obamacare.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 10:30 PM
This article talks about how some democrats have been threatening to abandon Obama on Health Law Provision. It says that the Democrats in congress have been more supportive of the idea that Americans should be allowed to keep the insurance coverage they are losing because of the Affordable Care Act after Obama already stated that they could keep their existing insurance. Obama is just digging himself a deeper hole.
Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
Still left wondering about Obamacare? Wonkblog’s Sarah Kliff and PostTV’s “In Play” have the Kliff Notes version for you.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

A much-simplified breakdown of what the ACA is, and how it will affect America.

 

Frankly, I think everyone, especially Republicans calling for it to be torn down, should read this. It's really their actions that have guttered the ACA so much, what with turning down what was essentially free money to make a political point. Of course, they don't pay the cost: that just goes to their Republican voters, who in their blind fury will inevitably blame the ACA, even though unpaid medical costs by the uninsured was going up anyway. 

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:29 PM

So requirements for obtaining Obamacare is basically asking us to be a bit...poor? Having national healthcare is the same as not having one because only the basics are paid. Honestly, my insurance company can do just about the same thing and I don't mind the bills if they can cover for EVERYBODY part I injured.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:43 PM

This article talks about Obama Care and how everyone will have to have health insurce eventually. It also talks about how Insurance companies cannot deny anyone from buying their healthcare because of pre-existing conditions. This could be beneficial  because there's many sick people who cannot afford heath care when they really need it, and no one will get screwed over.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 10:44 PM
This article includes FAQs concerning ObamaCare. All the questions asked and answered include a quick explanation of ObamaCare, all the existing insurance difficulties, process of enrollment and the legality of remaining without health insurance. The health cares lunch was very big and messy for Obama so it is interesting that it has taken this long for an article like this to come out.
Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
Some states are citing a conflict with state laws to defy the defense secretary’s order that gay spouses of National Guard members be given the same federal marriage benefits as heterosexual spouses.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

Despite DOMA being overturned, and despite much of the National Guard is indeed federally funded, some states - Texas is highlighted here - are refusing to grant homosexual spouses the same benefits as heterosexual spouses, saying that state laws overrule national laws when it comes to supposedly state-owned programs and military services.

 

Clearly, these states have never heard the story of old King Canute. The tide is coming in, and there is nothing you can really do to stop it. Frankly, there seems little reason why state governments are actually trying to block what seems like a drive for equality. Once again church - or religion itself - should be wholly separate from the state. Otherwise, as we can clearly see here, things tend to get very messy.

more...
Nghi Bui's curator insight, December 20, 2013 4:12 PM

Some States deny the confirming of marriage benefits for homosexual couples. Personally, I find this a little funny, because the article notes that these States want to "uphold their integrity". Uhm, what sort of integrity? That homosexual marriages are not....marriages- that is, believed by the people and conservative state legislators? I can't figure out this lame excuse of "integrity", because really, refusing to accept other people's decisions are no sort of integrity. (Feeling neutral about gay marriages does not mean I fervently support it).

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 1:09 PM

This article talks about Texas and other states refusing giving the same marriage benefits to gay couples as man/woman couples in the national guard. Defense Secretary Hagel had ordered that gay spouses of the National guard be given the same rights, but Texas and others aren't budging. 

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:58 PM

I think that gay people should have the same rights as other marriages. I think that especially same sex military couples should get the same benefits as everyone else. It doesn't affect anyone but them so it is obnoxious and annoying not to give it to them. Yes the states that are resisting to give the gay couples the benefits are very conservative it does not mean that we should not give everyone the same military couple benefits no matter who they are it is there right they risk there lives to serve our country and can't get couple benefits all because they are gay. That is absurd and ridiculous. 

Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
A bus driver for the Burnsville school district was fired last week for leading kids in Christian prayers on his bus, even after he was warned to stop — a move he considers a violation of his freedom of speech...

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

This story is about a pastor who moonlighted as a bus driver, but was subsequently fired for praying during the ride to school. His argument is that freedom of religion should allow him to pray.

 

Well, for a start, I strongly believe in a separation of church and state, and public schools are funded by the state. But I am also Muslim, and thus find it somewhat offensive that this pastor would freely engage in one sort of prayer that may not be wanted by other students. Of course, this enters one of those most vigorously fought debates in the United States: when do your Constitutional freedoms interfere with my Consitutional freedoms?

more...
Adriana Cruz's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:36 PM

This article talks about a bus driver who lost his job because, even after a few warnings, he chose to pray to students on his bus. He believes that him getting fired violates the first amndment, right to religion. I can see his point on this, but I feel like if you're doing something like this is public and offending others then youre in face in a sense violating their right to religion, so it's a lose-lose situation, and he was bound to lose his job.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 10:43 PM

I think that although i am a christian it  can be very uncomfortable when people get a religion forced  on them. Praying on a public school bus can probably be uncomfortable for some kids and although it was in good intentions it is probably not the best. It's good for people to share their religion but on their own time not during school. If it were a private christian school then that would be completely acceptable. 

Ashley O.'s curator insight, March 7, 2014 9:45 PM

That is unfair, he has every right to express his faith, just like those who are not religious and express their personal views. 

Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray are likely to at least set a friendly tone during budget talks.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

NPR takes a look at the similarities and differences between Ryan and Murray, and how they designed their budget plans.

 

I don't find anything particularly inflammatory in this piece. One issue that I do find is that Ryan does of course have a harder time trying to get his budget through; the 2013 shutdown showed that much is evident. I also find it strange that he wants to cut so much out of entitlement programs, considering he went to college on Social Security. And the whole "no tax increases" is a bit ridiculous. There is now way around the fact that we will continue to need ever more money to keep up with the world. Stagnation is a terribly powerful weapon, and time after time has it proved devastating.

more...
Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 8:25 PM

This article compares the leaders of the House and Senate Buget Committees. It is very good to know that two people who disagree about policy issues can still get along; which is very difficult to find nowadays. In Congress nowadays, this seems to be very rare. However, this does not mean it will be easy to compromise about the budget since the two parties they represent might not be willing. Many members of Congress should look at their example and learn from it.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 28, 2014 3:36 PM

This article talks about Paul Ryan and Patty Murray's  different approaches of handling the budget issue. They both each have their own style which approaching the decisions, and different plans as to how to solve the issue.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 11:42 PM

Both Paul Ryan and Patty Murray are extremely different I think it should be interesting to see how they will work together it says they both come from similar backgrounds. When Paul was 16 his father passed away and when Murray was in her teens her dad developed an illness and her mom found a job and they lived off of welfare so they are both raised with common backgrounds but their ideologies now are extremely different so it should be interesting to see how they work together. 

Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
Video on msnbc.com: Critical questions are being raised about data safety in light of hacking reports and news about NSA data collection. NBC’s Stephanie Gosk explains what happens after you hit ‘send’ on an email message.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

Rather than do what the video's description implies, Gosk takes a look at the hyperbolic-esque amount of personal information and public space that tech giants own.

 

I don't entirely know what to analyze here, as I pretty much knew about this data before. There is no way millions and millions of personal accounts and access points could function without gigantic data storage centers, free for access to the company that you use (i.e. Google for G-mail). Anyone who truly believes that their personal information on the Internet is for their eyes only is being naive.

more...
Melissa Aleman's curator insight, December 20, 2013 3:07 PM

This video enlightens us in depth of the workings of email and how it is possible for others to view and who could possibly be watching where it goes. Suprisingly the data doesnt stay in the states but actually travels over seas. This video just re stated all that we know and gave more detail about the whole situation.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 25, 2014 6:43 PM

This video shows us that it true when they say anything you put on the internet will be there forever, and many of us blow that off. I feel that we all need to be a little more mindful of what we say and do online, and we should keep a lot more private.

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 2, 2014 11:53 PM

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

Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

The NBC team takes a look at how the approval rating of Obama has suffered under various strains, most notably Obamacare.

 

Mostly a fair criticism by Brian Williams and Chuck Todd, but I think that some parts were unfairly exxagerated. For example, the graph showed that 42% approval was equivalent to almost zero. Obama's indecision on Syria was influence by a great number of factors, and the Snowden debacle was stifled by Russia granting asylum. Of course, my bias is somewhat unfair, but I do feel that the bandwagon effect causes public and news channel opinions to swing wildly.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

Not an interview or a special by Williams, this was basically a montage of a press conference with Kathleen Sebellius and various lawmakers.

 

Not to take the meaning out of her words, but it really does seem that Sebellius is just trying to replicate what Clinton did with Benghazi. In any administration, the ultimate resonsibility is to the President; even more so considering this is Obama's defining legacy. While Sebellius may have botched the execution, Obama should have been checking on progress and moving people where necessary. Faith in others is a wonderful thing in theory, and sounds lovely on the ears, but in practice, if you want something right, you do it yourself.

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

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

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

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

Alex fowler's curator insight, February 3, 2014 7:47 PM
I dont like Obama so I do not really like his healthcare and the fact that the website was having problems makes it even more sketchy and harder for it to be promoted and talked about well.
Rescooped by Sammy Masri 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 | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
Forget the Vitter amendment. Rand Paul wants to make sure that Congress can’t ever again write laws with provisions specific to lawmakers.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

The preview pretty much says everything about the article. Rand Paul doesn't want Obamacare to allow federal subsidies for members of the government.

 

Well, I guess you could argue for this, and even make it appeal to voters of all colors..up until the point where the salaries of governmental aides are revealed. Those federal subsidies were put in place in mind of those who genuinely cannot easily afford insurance under Obamacare. But then again, I'm sure Rand Paul sees no problem with his shiny $174,000 a year.

more...
Melissa Aleman's curator insight, November 11, 2013 6:00 AM

In this article, Rand Paul is pitching the idea to add an amendment that prohibits Congress from passing laws that Congress is exempt from and having to dealin with lawmakers. Its clearly aimed at Obamacare for the reasons that when it is in action, exchanges must be made by the congressmen and rulings from the O.P.M. in order to receive federal contributions. It is unlikely that Congress will go for more restrictions.

Paulina Ho's curator insight, December 19, 2013 7:53 PM

A kentucky senator, Rand Paul, wants an amendment forbidding senators and representatives to pass laws that don't apply equally to Congress and the citizens. Specifically aimed at Obamacare, this amendment will force lawmakers to disclose exchanges and rulings from the Office of Personnel Management in order to receive federal employer contributions. Amending the Constitution requires a majority vote in both chambers before it can be ratified, and I think Paul has a difficult task ahead of him to convince lawmakers to give up their authority to make laws.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 20, 2014 11:54 PM

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

Rescooped by Sammy Masri from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
Scoop.it!

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

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

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

MSNBC brings in Peter Baker, who was a White House correspondent during the Bush administration. He discusses how Cheney and Bush changed their views and respect of each other over the 8 years in office.

I don't necessarily have an argument or analysis for this particular video because I have no personal experience to fall on. My only recolllection of the Bush era is that my parents were annoyed at the Iraq War...and that John Kerry was a flip-flop. Judging purely from the video, and some speculation on my part, I think that Cheney was less focused on defeating terrorism, and recieved less advice on it, so was more open to consider other issues. This led to a cycle of Bush trusting others for support and advice, and Cheney being given more time, and so on and so forth.

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

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

 

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

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

 

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

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

Rescooped by Sammy Masri from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
Scoop.it!

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

BY 10/20 -- What Obama and the tea party have in common | Sammy Masri's BHS AP US Government | Scoop.it
They both disdain governing the way Madison intended.

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

George Will attempts to connect the antics of the antics of the Tea Party with the antics of Barack Obama. He uses the argument that Obama has overstepped his executive authority.

 

Right. Number One: Yes, Obamacare was passed without a single Republican vote. But that's called a majority. Madison also hated parties, so your argument is void. Number Two: Obamacare was actually a product of Congress. Number Three: If you would like attention-grabbing and brash action...please look to your own Mr. Ted Cruz.

A-thankyouverymuch.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rescooped by Sammy Masri from AP Government -- Watch or Read by Due Date
Scoop.it!

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

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

Via Teresa Herrin
Sammy Masri's insight:

Jim DeMint is the founder and owner of the Heritage Foundation, a think tank that supports conservative policies. He tries to convince his readers that Obamacare is indeed the worst American policy ever.

 

This is somewhat of a biased piece, written by a shamelessly conservative person. He seems to use the method that Fox News loves to use, and effectively picks the 0.01% of people who face higher costs. What most people - especially myself - would probably love to see is a full report of where costs rise, where they fall, how many people fail to benefit, and how many people get a better deal. But until that comprehensive report is created, we'll get more biased drivel like this...from both sides.

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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