Obama's Afghanistan speech
When Obama was running for president he told the people that he would change certain things that bush was doing. The one that he enforced the most was the Afghanistan war. So with Obama declaring that we send more troops and stay in war confuses me? I feel that we need to pull or men out of there, because all were doing is putting our men in danger and putting our country into a depression pretty much. I see no good in the war at all.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Sunday, November 29, 2009
#11
Real house wife's of Afghanistan: Do you feel the war is helping the women in Afghanistan?
I do not think that our US troops are helping one bit over there. I feel that it is possibly making it worse because the local men are afraid and worried about what is going to happen. This makes them even more angry when they go home to their wives which makes the men beat the women more. I think that when the US troops leave it will settle things over there, but i don't think that the beating will ever stop, no mater what we do. I feel that the beating will be less when we leave because the stress will be off of the men when they go home to there wives.
Another thing that can help is to educate the men so they can start a career. When the women are more educated than the men it makes the men feel that if the women are better than them, and this causes the abuse also.
I do not think that our US troops are helping one bit over there. I feel that it is possibly making it worse because the local men are afraid and worried about what is going to happen. This makes them even more angry when they go home to their wives which makes the men beat the women more. I think that when the US troops leave it will settle things over there, but i don't think that the beating will ever stop, no mater what we do. I feel that the beating will be less when we leave because the stress will be off of the men when they go home to there wives.
Another thing that can help is to educate the men so they can start a career. When the women are more educated than the men it makes the men feel that if the women are better than them, and this causes the abuse also.
#10
Renewal of surveillance laws: What are your views on the renewal of the patriot act of 2009?
My view on the patriot act is that it should not be renewed. Nothing about the act gives people their freedom nor privacy. I understand that the FBI has special powers of the common people but not unless they have suspicions. For example, there should be no suspicions on me for not supporting the war continuing. They can't just come into my house and raid it just for that reason.
I Feel that this law should be reexamined by the judges, the president and the congress; they should consider our privacy and freedom. In order to get our freedom out of this, it would also be nice to see a lawyer, who protects privacy, to oversee the law in order to keep it equal.
I do not feel that the national security letters are fair to the people, in order to get into peoples privacy i feel that the government needs a warrant for a good reason.
My view on the patriot act is that it should not be renewed. Nothing about the act gives people their freedom nor privacy. I understand that the FBI has special powers of the common people but not unless they have suspicions. For example, there should be no suspicions on me for not supporting the war continuing. They can't just come into my house and raid it just for that reason.
I Feel that this law should be reexamined by the judges, the president and the congress; they should consider our privacy and freedom. In order to get our freedom out of this, it would also be nice to see a lawyer, who protects privacy, to oversee the law in order to keep it equal.
I do not feel that the national security letters are fair to the people, in order to get into peoples privacy i feel that the government needs a warrant for a good reason.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
#9
Presidential power.
The three powers that the Constitution gives the president is:
1. To be in charge of the armed services.
2. Make appointments to the offices.
3. To convene the congress.
I could not find in the Constitution where it give the president implied powers. I feel that after Bush did this, that it is not right. When a president uses executive orders he is working around the law which is manipulative. Obama in his campaign said he wanted to stop what Bush was doing, but after getting in office, he started following Bush's footsteps. This is why the Constitution made the checks and balances law, in order for everything that passes to be fair.
The three powers that the Constitution gives the president is:
1. To be in charge of the armed services.
2. Make appointments to the offices.
3. To convene the congress.
I could not find in the Constitution where it give the president implied powers. I feel that after Bush did this, that it is not right. When a president uses executive orders he is working around the law which is manipulative. Obama in his campaign said he wanted to stop what Bush was doing, but after getting in office, he started following Bush's footsteps. This is why the Constitution made the checks and balances law, in order for everything that passes to be fair.
#8
Congress and voting?
I believe that the Congress should be voting by the politicos model. The Politicos model is a combo of delegate, trustee, and partisan roles. The reason i think this is because all three of the different roles have good qualities to them but also they have bad qualities to them. So if we choose only the good and put them all together we will get a good Congress.
Delegate: Vote how the people want you to vote; this can be good and bad. Good, because some people are informed on the situation but others aren't and they listen to hear say.
Trustee: it is there evaluation on how they vote. Good; they have access to more information on what they are voting for then the people do, but whats bad is the peoples value always don't agree on what they do.
Partisan: They are told by their political party how to vote. This can be good because different parties focus on different things, so if you vote for the good then it turns out good. Bad is that you have to vote for all not just certain topics under your party.
Politicos: The good thing about this is that you balance all of the good out of the above three roles.
I believe that the Congress should be voting by the politicos model. The Politicos model is a combo of delegate, trustee, and partisan roles. The reason i think this is because all three of the different roles have good qualities to them but also they have bad qualities to them. So if we choose only the good and put them all together we will get a good Congress.
Delegate: Vote how the people want you to vote; this can be good and bad. Good, because some people are informed on the situation but others aren't and they listen to hear say.
Trustee: it is there evaluation on how they vote. Good; they have access to more information on what they are voting for then the people do, but whats bad is the peoples value always don't agree on what they do.
Partisan: They are told by their political party how to vote. This can be good because different parties focus on different things, so if you vote for the good then it turns out good. Bad is that you have to vote for all not just certain topics under your party.
Politicos: The good thing about this is that you balance all of the good out of the above three roles.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Blog Post #7
"Strict or Loose Constructionist?"
I would consider myself a strict constructionist not a loose one. The reason being is I think that the states should have power over there region because all regions are different from each other. For example, California is the total opposite of North Dakota, so why should they have the same social laws since they have different problems. This relates to "implied powers" because the central government is taking too much of what could be the states power away. The preamble limits what the government could be involved in but when it is interpreted broadly, it starts to take away from the individual and the state.
I would consider myself a strict constructionist not a loose one. The reason being is I think that the states should have power over there region because all regions are different from each other. For example, California is the total opposite of North Dakota, so why should they have the same social laws since they have different problems. This relates to "implied powers" because the central government is taking too much of what could be the states power away. The preamble limits what the government could be involved in but when it is interpreted broadly, it starts to take away from the individual and the state.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Blog Post #6
If we are living by these "informal requirements" then why don't we put them in the Constitution? Is there something wrong with them? I feel that they make for unfair elections. For example: If there was a smart poor man running against a dumb rich man, the rich man would win because he has more advertisement and money to put out.
Before women got to vote I highly doubt that men represented them. For example: Men did not vote out the child labor laws for decades; for women it would have been there first priority. I feel that still today we need to represent ourselves because why trust them now when they didn't help us then? There are not many middle class men, and the only way there would be is if they married higher class, or they had a financial backer. This is a concern because money can't buy brain power and if you're rich it doesn't mean that you are smart. So the middle class men that will never make it but are smart and can help us out will never be in office due to financial problems.
Before women got to vote I highly doubt that men represented them. For example: Men did not vote out the child labor laws for decades; for women it would have been there first priority. I feel that still today we need to represent ourselves because why trust them now when they didn't help us then? There are not many middle class men, and the only way there would be is if they married higher class, or they had a financial backer. This is a concern because money can't buy brain power and if you're rich it doesn't mean that you are smart. So the middle class men that will never make it but are smart and can help us out will never be in office due to financial problems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)