Connor Carter's BHS GOPO
2 views | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Connor Carter!

BY 4/16 -- Do Students Still Have Free Speech in School?

BY 4/16 -- Do Students Still Have Free Speech in School? | Connor Carter's BHS GOPO |
Social media has eroded young people's privacy—and advocates are trying to win it back.
Connor Carter's insight:

I believe that students still have freedom of speech, and there are only instances that may impact one's freedom of speech in cases where school officials/administrators are impacted. When student's protest their right to speech and also try to receive discipline and instruction from teachers and parents, it is difficult to pair the two. Kids should not be able to say anything they want, therefore I think it is the school's responsibility to censor some occurrences of harsh behavior as part of their role to teach children to be respectable. It is a difficult case nonetheless. 

Mel Mountain Du's curator insight, April 16, 2014 1:20 AM

Personally, I would argue that this is an infringement upon 1st amendment rights. Even if there is a contract. Because of course, contracts with minors are null and void, if not usually illegal. Tinker v.s. Des Moines should be upheld. The technology has changed. Civil rights have not. Instead, there should be "Cyber Education" from a young age, teaching how to have a healthy relationship with technology and online media.

Andy Nguyen's curator insight, April 16, 2014 4:26 AM

With students becoming more active nowadays on social media, the school administration obviously cannot control what they can't or can post online. While I agree that students should be able to freely express themselves online, I also believe that students cannot post comments that could be considered bullying of people especially teachers and students. But the question still remains: who should regulate these comments? This puts us in an awful predicament. We must find a middle ground in order for this technology age to successfully propagate.. 

Weiyi Wang's curator insight, April 16, 2014 11:57 PM

I think students should be able to say whatever they want as long as it's within reasonable bounds. This is what the first amendment says after all. No one has the right to limit or take away this privilege. The internet has extended free speech far beyond anything that can be controlled anyways. Imagine how much manpower and money would go into censoring the billions of student online interactions. It is up to the students to determine how to properly and safely exercise their first amendment rights.

Scooped by Connor Carter!

BY 4/3 -- Obama's Tuesday's Address about ACA Enrollments (NBC News Video)

BY 4/3 -- Obama's Tuesday's Address about ACA Enrollments (NBC News Video) | Connor Carter's BHS GOPO |
Watch the latest news videos and episodes of the NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams. - NBC News
Connor Carter's insight:

I think that Obama's message will appeal to the American people and make him seem more cordial and agreeable, yet I believe the situation is more complicated than Obama may interpret it to be.

Colin Shi's curator insight, April 4, 2014 11:34 PM

At this moment, president Obama is extremely pleased about the progress in the Affordability Care Act since last October. More than 7 million have signed up, and many problems, both technical and logistical, have been diagnosed since the launch. Obama sees this progress positively and accuses Republicans for obstructing progress, that history only remembers those who promote progress. Obama, like any politician, but remain confident in his own agenda, even though he may know the program is overly complicated, and has a huge potential for chaos in the coming years.

Mel Mountain Du's curator insight, April 6, 2014 6:56 PM

With 7.1 million sign-ups at, it appears that Obama is recovering from his disastrous opening. It is still unclear if enough young, healthy people have signed up, in order to balance the healthcare budget. What he really needs now, though, is Democratic support.

Nathan Hiransomboon's curator insight, April 7, 2014 10:32 AM

Healthcare is a basic human right guaranteed by the United Nation's Deceleration of Human Rights. At the point that the United States is one of the only developed nations in the world that doesn't have a universal healthcare system, the 3 million people that got Medicare through Obamacare allows the US to reach this goal.

Rescooped by Connor Carter from AP Government & Politics!

Obama's 'Feisty' Message to Republican Foes - NBC News

Obama's 'Feisty' Message to Republican Foes - NBC News | Connor Carter's BHS GOPO |
Chief White House Correspondent Chuck Todd explains that there’s a lot we don’t know about the enrollment figures including the number of healthy young peopl...

Via Teresa Herrin
Connor Carter's insight:

I agree with Obama. Despite the setbacks with HealthCare.Gov, I think Republicans need to focus on the importance of health care and basic economic needs for all Americans.

No comment yet.
Rescooped by Connor Carter from AP Government & Politics!

Feinstein Is Right. The CIA’s Out of Control.

Feinstein Is Right. The CIA’s Out of Control. | Connor Carter's BHS GOPO |
Five years of frustration boiled over when Sen. Dianne Feinstein flayed the CIA on the Senate floor Tuesday. She accused the agency of lying, cheating and stealing to block a 6,300-page report on the CIA’s secret prisons and torture from seeing the light of day. In essence, she said, the CIA was spying on the Senate Intelligence Committee’s...

Via Teresa Herrin
Connor Carter's insight:

I don't think the CIA should receive so much criticism. It is their job to do the dirty work in order to keep our nation safe. There are secrets that must be kept, and I think we should let the CIA do its job and try to help the USA. Leave them out of the media.

Laura Ojinnaka's curator insight, March 18, 2014 10:13 PM

Senator Feinstein is a democratic senator from California and the head of the intelligence committee. She is accusing the CIA of criminal activity in improperly searching a computer network set up for lawmakers investigating allegations that the agency used torture in terror investigations.

This is newsworthy because the CIA is over stepping their boundaries, and engaging in illegal behavior.

I agree with the senator and believe that Senate committee should have access to the CIA's files, if they are indeed committing crimes, and should be monitored. 

carly johnson's curator insight, March 22, 2014 10:47 PM

Feinstein is a senator to California and has led the intelligence committee for 5 years. She claims that CIA agents have been spying on hearings and going through their files. She believes they are using this to cover up things that they have done. Accusing the CIA of this is a big accusation, so the media is widely covering this. This could cause a big investigation, and regulations to be changed. I think when the government starts spying on itself to cover things up that the deceit and spying has gone too far. The CIA should be investigated and be held accountable.

Tiffany Sabbaghi's curator insight, March 23, 2014 3:47 PM

(Absent on 3/13 and 3/14)

Senator Feinstein is the senior United States Senator from California and member of the democratic party, she is also head of the intelligence committee. 

She has accused the CIA of lying, cheating, and also stealing to block 6300 page report on the CIA's secret prisons and torture. She has said that the agency is guilty of spying on the Senate Intelligence Committee's staff in order to cover it's own misdeeds.

This information is newsworthy because of the fact that President Barack Obama banned the prisons due to the torture. According to her, they are essentially breaking the law and working on their own agenda.

I think that Senator Feinstein is doing the right thing by exploiting the actions of the CIA, since their tactics of getting information has always been controversial due to all the senseless torturing and spying. I think she is doing her part in trying to protect her constituents. 

Scooped by Connor Carter!

BY 4/3 -- READ SCOOP INSTRUCTIONS BELOW -- Death of the White House Press Corps

BY 4/3 -- READ SCOOP INSTRUCTIONS BELOW -- Death of the White House Press Corps | Connor Carter's BHS GOPO |
With a Twitter-savvy president and their own ailing media companies, Lloyd Grove finds the boys in the briefing room more depressed than ever.
Connor Carter's insight:

1. April 3rd, 2010

2.  group of journalists/correspondents usually stationed in the White House to cover POTUS, White House events, and news briefs

3. Describes Obama's presidency where he uses media outlets in order to allow the American people and outsiders to have an inside view of the White House and understand what goes on in Washington.

4. 1.7 million followers on Twitter, roughly 500,000 fans on Facebook

5. I think the author is concerned that the media outlets in Washington do not reveal the overall picture of what goes on in Washington. The use of Twitter and Facebook are good, but it may show a beneficial view of Washington that is providing a false image to the public. It creates a lack of connection and relationship, similar to government during the Watergate Scandal. 

6. I believe that it is important to provide access to Washington. The prominence of Twitter and Facebook over the years leaves many people to have a positive view of Washington, and I don't think that the use of Facebook and Twitter accurately exemplifies the White House. I think it is the people's responsibility to learn about their government other than through the use of popular social media outlets. This highlights how massive the social media market has grown over the years. We are responsible to filter our own content when learning about new ideas and peoples, especially when it comes to matters as important and crucial as Washington DC, the White House, and the POTUS.

Colin Shi's curator insight, April 4, 2014 11:09 PM

1. April 3, 2010

2. The white house press corps is the group in charge of media coverage of the president, that interprets and presents the president's image to the public.

3. The president can directly present himself to the public without a middleman that filters and interprets the information.

4. 42.4 million followers on Twitter, 39 million likes on facebook

5. The author is concerned that the job of the white house press corps is going obsolete. This trend may have significant consequences because the president will likely present himself with a personal bias, sometimes even called a "hagiography". Not having press conferences also presents a problem because it will no longer give the public a clear picture of the president.

6. I am pretty concerned about an age in which the president is able to present himself freely to the public. I feel that the president's use of social media outlets to communicate often gives us an attitude of insincerity. With this lack of professionalism, traditional values unravel, and the general public loses trust in the president. One may argue that the media filter distorts his message, but provided that they have reliable expertise, they should still be able to do the job better than the president himself. Although bias is prevalent regardless of who presents the president in the media, having an outside source should mitigate bias to some extent. Score: 3.

Mel Mountain Du's curator insight, April 6, 2014 6:44 PM

1. 4/3/14

2. Media correspondents and journalists deployed in the White House who's job is to cover events and announcements by the POTUS.

3. A filterless Presidency is when the Whitehouse can directly communicate with the public without a 3rd party in media.

4. Obama currently has 42.3 million Twitter followers, and 39 Million Facebook Followers.

5.The Author's concern is that the Press Corp's niche is dissapearing due to social Media such as Twitter and Facebook. This means that the President can dictate the direction of the conversation, instead of being asked questions by the media. The author fears that this will lead to the President becoming too favorably viewed and unquestioned.

6. I am a (2), only somewhat concerned. A very large part of Obama's appeal is his charisma. The Press Corp will be the most upset about it, and that is fine by me. I believe this will at least be positive in the sense that the President will have a more personal dialogue with the American Public. This is an adaptation of the Obama Administration to keep up with the times.

Nathan Hiransomboon's curator insight, April 7, 2014 11:10 AM

1. 04.03.10

2. Members of President Obama's staff that would typically cover his actions and deal with public relations

3. A Presidency where there is an unprecedented level of transparency

4. Facebook: 39,767,002

Twitter: 42.4M

5. President Obama is a unique President in how he addressed social media. Not only does he want to a lot of PR himself, but this puts his Press Corps  in danger. He strays away from the norm of other presidents.

6. (1) President Obama was elected for his first term for his connection that he made with the youth. Not only was he able to have the youth come out and vote, although they typically wouldn't, but he also gained the support of African Americans to vote as well. This is extremely strategic in how he was first elected. This trait if being personable is a trait that wouldn't necessarily be something needed by other Presidents, thus the need for the Press Corps to exist. However just because they roles and jobs may be in danger doesn't mean that any concern should exist. 

Scooped by Connor Carter!

BY 4/3 -- Ruling on limits means campaign contributions could soar (great graphic)

BY 4/3 -- Ruling on limits means campaign contributions could soar (great graphic) | Connor Carter's BHS GOPO |
The U.S. Supreme Court overturned an additional limit on the aggregate amount that an individual could give to candidates, party committees and PACs. Here's what it changes.
Connor Carter's insight:

I believe that with this new piece of legislation, the wealthy will have more control over the election process, therefore making the powerful more powerful and denying the poor a voice in political decision-making.

Laurence Zhang's curator insight, April 4, 2014 12:40 AM

US Supreme Court's new ruling allows for individuals to donate to as many candidates as they want. I disagree with their ruling. This will only lead to money playing a larger role in politics.

Nathan Hiransomboon's curator insight, April 7, 2014 10:47 AM

The ability for someone to pay for multiple candidates gives particular parties more power over others. I believe this will disproportionately support the Republican party as I would tend to lean towards the assumption that Republicans are typically the "Top 10%" and would thus be more likely to donate more money to have a politician support their point of view. 

Scooped by Connor Carter!

BY 4/3 -- Supreme Court strikes down limits on campaign donations

BY 4/3 -- Supreme Court strikes down limits on campaign donations | Connor Carter's BHS GOPO |
A split Supreme Court Wednesday strikes down limits on the total amount of money an individual may spend on political candidates, parties and political action committees but keeps limits per candidate and per committee.
Connor Carter's insight:

I would have remained with the limits that were previously enforced. I think raising the amount that one could contribute to a candidate puts more power in the hands of the wealthy and allows the upper class to control more of politics. Those who are poor will have less influence in politics. 

Henry's comment, April 2, 2014 5:01 PM
I would agree with McCutcheon because an individual should have the right to donate as much money as they want to candidates that they support and shouldn't be limited to it. Limiting them to a certain amount of donation violates the first amendment of freedom of speech and I totally hella against that.
Colin Shi's curator insight, April 2, 2014 7:26 PM

I agree with McCutcheon's decision to donate as much as he wants because this is a completely legitimate way to show support for a candidate. The donation amounts are all public information, so it's not like this is illegal activity. The amount you give is proportional to the amount of support you have, although there could be given limitations of financial resources for some candidates. 

Benjamin Dischinger's curator insight, April 3, 2014 10:28 PM

I feel that there should not be any limits set on the amount of money one person can give because when it comes down to it, money plays an important part in the game of politics, but in the end it's not the money that wins elections. What wins elections is the drive of the candidates to make a better place for their constituents and their non-constituents alike. 

Rescooped by Connor Carter from AP Government & Politics!

DUE BY 3/13 @ 11:59 pm -- Edward Snowden looms over Pulitzer Prizes

DUE BY 3/13 @ 11:59 pm -- Edward Snowden looms over Pulitzer Prizes | Connor Carter's BHS GOPO |
Next month, the trustees who oversee America’s most distinguished journalistic award could face their toughest decision in at least four decades. The issue before the Pulitzer Prize Board: Does it honor reporting by The Washington Post and The Guardian based on stolen government documents that are arguably detrimental to the national security...

Via Teresa Herrin
Connor Carter's insight:

I believe Ellsburg does deserve a Pulitzer, but the way in which he delivered the information to the people violated the law. I dont agree with his tactics, but the significance of the papers between the people and government was big to those who were not willing to trust the government. He is similar to MLK.

Laura Ojinnaka's curator insight, March 18, 2014 9:59 PM

Edward Snowden is a government contractor that worked at an NSA center. He was a three-month employee of a government consulting firm, Booz Allen Hamilton. His controversy was that he leaked information regarding top-secret government surveillance programs. He leaked National Security Agency (NSA) documents to The Guardian and The Washington Post regarding top-secret government surveillance programs.

carly johnson's curator insight, March 21, 2014 5:04 PM

Snowden revealed many of the NSA's documents to the media and other countries. He was charged with stealing government property and basically treason, because he revealed information to other countries. He was in another country when he was found out and has been in Russia on a one year asylum. Many americans view him as a traitor while others view him as a hero. Some think that the people had a right to know what he has disclosed and the government shouldn't of hid it. 

Tiffany Sabbaghi's curator insight, March 23, 2014 3:29 PM

(Absent on 3/13 and 3/14)

Edward Snowden is known for being an American computer specialist and the former employee of the CIA, as well as a former contractor for the NSA. He became "famous" for disclosing extremely classified documents to other media outlets. The documents he leaked revealed classified details of global surveillance programs run by the NSA. The controversy surrounding Edward Snowden concerns whether what he did was right or wrong and whether the issue of national security vs. information privacy is taken into account and if he should get punished, even though he has been charged.