Uprisings in Libya

This uprising in Libya, a state in North Africa has gained a lot of international attention. This uprising started on February 15, 2011, and the inspiration for these uprisings is directly associated to the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt. These protests are against their government and their leader Muammar al-Gadaffi.He has been in power for over forty years. The protests started off non-violent but have turned violent. The protesters are saying that Muammar Gadaffi has been giving his supporters guns and weapons to use against them and that he is sending patrols around the city. There has been more than a thousand people killed in less than two weeks. The pros of this uprising are that if they succeed they might get what they want which is a better government and leader. Another pro is that no matter what happens they have gained the attention of the United Nations which has already started to do things. The cons of the uprising are that there will be a lot of people killed because of the protests. Another con is that it has turned the people of Libya against each other with the supporters of Muammar and the non supporters of Muammar. When President Obama was asked about this he said that it is time for Muammar to step down saying that he has lost legitimacy to rule with his violent crackdown on the Libyan people. He also said that Muammar should be punished for all the bad things he did. This relates to class because it is an example of the president being the Chief Diplomat. 

Sources:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110227/ap_on_re_us/us_us_libya_22
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Libyan_uprising
www.youtube.com

Gridlock

Gridlock is the inability to accomplish goals. Gridlock is a direct consequence of divided government. A divided government is when one party controls the white house and the other party controls one or both of the houses of congress. Some say divided government is good because it makes opposition to those in power and it limits spending and expansion of undesirable laws. In our government right now there is a divided government. The democrats control the white house and the republicans control the house of representatives. This causes gridlock because if the president who is a democrat wants to pass let's say his new health care bill, he has to put it through congress and without their approval he can not get something done that would probably be very beneficial to the American people. Some say that gridlock does not exist. They say this because they make the point that it is just part of our type of government and that we will have indecision with anything we do. The cons of gridlock are that it shuts down government operations. The pros of gridlock are that it slows down the decision making process which is an example of checks and balances. I think that gridlock does exist and is not a good part of our government. I think this because why should we have two sides in our government when we could all be on the same team and we could make the United States a better place to live instead of just arguing  with each other.





Sources:
Youtube.com
Wikipedia.com
Notes

Race to the Top

Race to the top is a 4.35 billion dollar United Sates Department of Education program to help create reforms in schools K through 12 in the United States. This program was announced by President Barack Obama and the Secretary of Education Arne Duncan on July 24, 2009. To get the money from this grant you would have to meet certain criteria like how successful your state was at giving kids their education, how good the teachers are in the schools, and doing all the things the government wants you to do. The effects of race to the top are that out of the fifty states forty eight of them adopted common standards for K through 12. Also, there was 350 million federal grant money that went to funding the making of having tests that met the common standards all the states adopted. There was a timetable that was created for race to the top that was separated into two phases. If a state wanted to participate they had to have their entry in on January 19, 2010. Forty states made the deadline. Then if you applied you had to see if you made the cut, so the government announced "winners" on March 4, 2010. Then in phase two the same thing happened just at different time increments. If you were a state that "won" there were different amounts of money you could have been awarded. In phase one the lower range was from twenty to 75 million dollars and the higher range was from 350 to 700 million dollars. Some critics of the race to the top program say that there is too much government interference in education and they say that there is no proof that it will work and that attempts in the past have not been successful. I think that it will be a good thing because we have already seen the benefits of it in our school. Some examples would be getting the smart boards or the class set of ipod touches.





Sources:
http://www.youtube.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_to_the_top
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=1024&bih=580&q=race+to+the+top&aq=0&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=race+to

Terrorist Bombs Moscow

Today, January 24, 2011, in Moscow, Russia, there was a suicide bombing that killed at least 35 people and wounded 180 people. This bombing was at Moscow's busiest airport Domodedovo. This bombing turned the airport into a smoky, blood splattered hall of dismembered bodies, scared survivors, and abandoned suitcases. There has been no one blamed for the bombing but Russia suspects that it was the Islamic militants in the southern part of Russia, Chechnya. They think that it was the Islamic because in March 2010 they bombed Moscow's subway system that caused forty deaths. After the attack the president Dmitry Medvedev immediately declared it a terrorist attack and tightened the security on Moscow's other two commercial airports and Moscow's other key facilities. This is the air port's second time being involved in a terrorist attack because in 2004 two female suicide bombers got through the lax security there, got two tickets illegally, and boarded a plane. Once they were on the plane they and were in the air, they blew it up killing 90 people. For the people that were injured in the bombing, Vladimir Putin ordered the health minister to send her deputies to the hospitals to make sure they wounded were getting the care they needed. Back here in the United States, Barack Obama called the catastrophe an "outrageous act of terrorism" and assured Dmitry Medvedev that he has the United States full support. Also, British Prime Minister David Cameron gave Russia his full support. I think that Russia feels the same way we did when we had 9/11 and I feel for them. If this were to happen in the United States I really don't know what our government would do. Would we declare war? Look past it? Or would we do the same Russia did? I hope that this never happens to us and that our security at the airports is on the top of its game.

http://news.yahoo.com/video/us-15749625/terror-suspected-in-deadly-moscow-bombing-23951084
This is a link to see the news of the bombing.

This is the bombing the two women did.


 This is the bombing from today.

Sources:
http://news.yahoo.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUfv3D14ZcE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuzNoYa4jQY

Drinking Age

The controversy of what age you should legally be allowed to drink alcohol has been a very controversial issue for a very long time. All 50 of the states in the United States have in law that no one under the age of twenty one is allowed to drink but there are minor exceptions in some states like if you are under parental supervision, at home, or it is for a medical purpose. In twenty nine states if you drink underage privately with parental consent it is allowed. In thirty states you are allowed to drink for religious purposes. In thirteen states you are allowed to drink for educational purposes. People who want the age to be lowered say that having in law that you can't drink until you are twenty one only makes drinking look even cooler and pushes drinking into private and not as controlled environments leading to more health and life endangering behaviors. People who oppose lowering the minimum drinking age from twenty one say that teens can not handle the responsibility of alcohol and that they are more likely to harm or even kill someone by drinking before they are twenty one. They back this up with the fact that traffic fatalities decreased when the MLDA increased. I think the drinking age should not be lowered because there is not reason for it. All that drinking does is lead to some kind of problem. There is no real benefit to drinking. It can lead to alcoholism, death from diseases, and drunkenness which leads to a lot more problems. If the age was lowered I think America would be in an even bigger mess then what we are in now. So, I think the age should stay the same.

Sources:
http://drinkingage.procon.org/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nj_ayQtv7I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qQzYUZ_MNU&feature=related

Health Care Reform

When Barack Obama started campaigning in 2008 he urged for a reform in health care because he thought that health care was a threat to our economy and should be a right for every American to have health care. So, in March of 2010, Congress passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and they also passed the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. President Barack Obama signed both of them into law. He also signed into law Executive Order 13535 which states that no federal funds are to be used for abortion services. These new laws reform our health care greatly. People who support the health care reform and these new laws say that it is a "historic victory" and a "landmark legislation". They also say that it will cut costs greatly, make health care more affordable, and protect consumers from unfair insurance practices. They propose that with this reform the nations debt by $100 billion by 2020 and by $1 trillion by 2030. President Obama said that tens of thousands of uninsured Americans with preexisting conditions will finally be able to purchase health care. The people who do not like the new reform say that it is a "socialist" and "unconstitutional" takeover of health care that will be raising the cost of health care and decreasing the quality of the health care we would get. Also, they say that over a ten year span this new bill will cost more than $2.5 trillion and will put the United States deeper into debt. They say there are a lot of questions that are unanswered that are very important for America to know. I think that health care should be a personal thing. I do not think that everyone should have the same health care because some people are poor and others are not. I also do not think that you should punish the people who have good health care because they have money and give them not so good health care just because they can not afford it.





Sources:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-6Pht8HdO8
http://healthcarereform.procon.org/
http://www.google.com/

Death Penalty

The death penalty has been very controversial for a long time. 1136 people have been executed from 1997 to 2008. Most of these executions have been from lethal injection. Lethal injection is when they give you a shot that kills you. Most of the people that have to face the death penalty are murderers, treason, espionage, and other crimes. 72% of the public support the death penalty, 25% say that they oppose it, and 5% have no say on the topic. People who oppose the death penalty say that it doesn't stop crime at all, wrongly gives the government the power to take life, and they say that it creates social injustices by targeting colored people and people who can't afford attorneys more than other people. The people who support the death penalty support it because they say that it is a great tool for preserving law and order, that it helps stop crime, and it costs less than having people going to prison for life. They also try to say that it is alright because of the "eye for an eye" saying. That means if you were able to take a life that you should have your own life taken in return. Another argument for having the death penalty is that it helps families who have lost a loved one to come to some kind of closure and that if someone killed someone and they have to face the death penalty it ensures that they will never do it again. I think that the death penalty is not alright. The majority of America support the death penalty but there has been a slight decline since there was a peak in 1994. I think it is not good because I think that everyone deserves a second chance. You can always change someone, even if they have done something really bad. I also think it is bad because I can't think of any crime that you should be killed over. Another reason I think it is not good because I think that a prisoner would prefer to have the death penalty than spend the rest of his life in prison so why give him the satisfaction. The public opinion is that if they had to choose between life in prison with no possibility of parole or have the death penalty, 52% prefer the death penalty and 43% prefer the life imprisonment.

Sources:
http://deathpenalty.procon.org/
http://www.gallup.com/poll/9913/Death-Penalty.aspx#3