On Wednesday, November 28th, the Republican Party had a debate based on questions that everyday citizens posted on the website www.youtube.com. It was a different idea and turned out to be better than regular reporters asking questions to the speakers. There was far less mud slinging than the Democratic Debate. I enjoyed this debate more than the democratic one. I felt like the youtube format made it easier to follow along. I especially enjoyed the end of the debate when Rudy Giuliani bragged how the NY Yankees won 4 world series when he was mayor of New York. Mitt Romney replied that he was excited when the Boston Red Sox won after 83 years, though it was actually 86 years. The best line of the debate came from Mitt Romney when he said "All Americans love their sports teams and hate the Yankees."
Though it seems that there are tons of Republicans running, I thought that Rudy Giuliani was the most educated about every subject and had brains to be the next president. I guess this is no surprise, because he was the one that was chosen by an internet site that compared my beliefs to the candidates. He did impress me with how much he actually knew about the major controversial issues that we have today.
My second pick would go to Mike Huckabee. He was also very knowledgeable and seemed that he would be a good president. Plus he's Chuck Norris approved!!! How could he go wrong?
My least two favorite candidates were Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. Though the Ron Paul has the Ron Paul Girl on his side, I do not agree with any of his policies, and the man's appearance scares me. I don't think he would be good president at all. Though Mitt Romney lightened the mood at the end of the debate, it seemed as though he flip flopped on issues and only said things that he thought people wanted to hear. I hate when politicians go around their main beliefs just to get everyone's vote. It seemed as though he was the only republican candidate that had this problem.
If I had the choice, I would vote for Rudy Giuliani because he is probably the most educated of the candidates and may be the only one that will be able to beat Hilary Clinton or any other democratic politician.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
New Sanctuary Movement Event
The New Sanctuary Movement Event Meeting was very informative. The main speaker was very knowledgeable and seemed to have the right plan to fix the immigration situation. The pastor that spoke seemed less knowledgeable about immigration. He kept comparing immigration or the New Sanctuary Movement to the Nazis, which kept confusing me because they are unrelated topics.
I feel that the immigration problem cannot be fixed by a wall between Mexico and the United States. People will still find a way around the wall. The government needs to make more visas and set up a system to make it easy for people to be documented citizens. The United States also has to put special interest into Mexico and help the country, like we are in Iraq, to help purify their corrupt system and help increase and stabilize their economy. The money used to build the wall could instead could be used to help Mexico's economy. One Mexico's economy is set, it will be a nicer place to live and there would not be as great as a need to immigrate to another country.
I feel that the immigration problem cannot be fixed by a wall between Mexico and the United States. People will still find a way around the wall. The government needs to make more visas and set up a system to make it easy for people to be documented citizens. The United States also has to put special interest into Mexico and help the country, like we are in Iraq, to help purify their corrupt system and help increase and stabilize their economy. The money used to build the wall could instead could be used to help Mexico's economy. One Mexico's economy is set, it will be a nicer place to live and there would not be as great as a need to immigrate to another country.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Las Vegas Democratic Debate
The Las Vegas Democratic Debate was held November 15, 2007 at UNLV.
The Las Vegas Democratic Debate was mostly what I thought it would be. It was incredibly stereotypical of what a normal debate would be. Some good points, lots of arguing/mudslinging, and rants being rudely interrupted. Hilary and Barack argued with each other's policies and personal mistakes. Mid way through the debate, I found myself falling asleep. The best part about the debate was that the other candidates, besides Hilary and Barack, were able to speak and rant their policies.
Bill Richardson and Joe Biden were the most interesting to listen to and I would most likely choose to vote for one of them. Bill Richardson is the Governor of New Mexico and Joe Biden is a senator from Delaware. It seemed that Richardson's experience as Governor was relevant to many controversial issues that would have to be dealt by the future president. Joe Biden made many good points and was extremely interesting to watch. The problem with voting for one of these two is that they will not be able to win the democratic primary and therefore will never be able to become the next President of the United States of America.
The Las Vegas Democratic Debate was mostly what I thought it would be. It was incredibly stereotypical of what a normal debate would be. Some good points, lots of arguing/mudslinging, and rants being rudely interrupted. Hilary and Barack argued with each other's policies and personal mistakes. Mid way through the debate, I found myself falling asleep. The best part about the debate was that the other candidates, besides Hilary and Barack, were able to speak and rant their policies.
Bill Richardson and Joe Biden were the most interesting to listen to and I would most likely choose to vote for one of them. Bill Richardson is the Governor of New Mexico and Joe Biden is a senator from Delaware. It seemed that Richardson's experience as Governor was relevant to many controversial issues that would have to be dealt by the future president. Joe Biden made many good points and was extremely interesting to watch. The problem with voting for one of these two is that they will not be able to win the democratic primary and therefore will never be able to become the next President of the United States of America.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Interactive Constitution Part 2
http://www.constitutioncenter.org/constitution/
7th Amendment
"In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law" (Constitution of the United States).
The 7th Amendment says that one can get a trail judged by peers for any civil case that involves more than twenty dollars. A judge cannot override or influence the jury to choose one decision.
This amendment is very outdated. At the time of the constitution, twenty dollars was a lot of money. Nowadays, twenty dollars has a lesser value. The system has also changed. There are now different types of courts, such as small claims. To try someone in a small claims court the controversy has to exceed five hundred dollars and the decision is made by a judge instead of a jury. The amendment does not apply anymore though it continues to be apart of the bill of rights.
7th Amendment
"In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law" (Constitution of the United States).
The 7th Amendment says that one can get a trail judged by peers for any civil case that involves more than twenty dollars. A judge cannot override or influence the jury to choose one decision.
This amendment is very outdated. At the time of the constitution, twenty dollars was a lot of money. Nowadays, twenty dollars has a lesser value. The system has also changed. There are now different types of courts, such as small claims. To try someone in a small claims court the controversy has to exceed five hundred dollars and the decision is made by a judge instead of a jury. The amendment does not apply anymore though it continues to be apart of the bill of rights.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
The Family Jewels
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB222/family_jewels_wilderotter.pdf
•Read The Family Jewels summary…pick one of the “skeletons” from the report and write a one paragraph reflection
•10, 11, and 12 are particularly interesting
The Family Jewels is a CIA Document that uncovers many CIA covert operations that were classified. Many of the "skeletons" listed in the article make the CIA seem sneaky and suspicious. If the public found out the CIA was continuing to do these types of actions today it would not be happy. The 10th skeleton explained how the CIA experimented with interrogating prisoners using drugs, 11th dealt with the assassinations of world leaders, and 12th was about groups being monitored. Many of the other skeletons were about wire tapping or reading through mail. These actions violate citizen rights and is unconstitutional. It is surprising that the public does not demand more current information about the CIA activities more recent "skeletons." I believe that the CIA should keep doing their job to get information to keep the homeland safe, as long as they are not caught breaking law. It is important that the CIA has made their mistakes public, knowing that the past cannot change. They should continue to release old classified information to distract the public from the new skeletons of today to be able to continue their work.
The Family Jewels is a CIA Document that uncovers many CIA covert operations that were classified. Many of the "skeletons" listed in the article make the CIA seem sneaky and suspicious. If the public found out the CIA was continuing to do these types of actions today it would not be happy. The 10th skeleton explained how the CIA experimented with interrogating prisoners using drugs, 11th dealt with the assassinations of world leaders, and 12th was about groups being monitored. Many of the other skeletons were about wire tapping or reading through mail. These actions violate citizen rights and is unconstitutional. It is surprising that the public does not demand more current information about the CIA activities more recent "skeletons." I believe that the CIA should keep doing their job to get information to keep the homeland safe, as long as they are not caught breaking law. It is important that the CIA has made their mistakes public, knowing that the past cannot change. They should continue to release old classified information to distract the public from the new skeletons of today to be able to continue their work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)