Government First Period

The State of the Union Address

2006-02-07T09:54:00.000-08:00

I believe that Cal Thomas is correct in saying that the address was full of "lies and distortions." President Bush wants us to be free of our "addiction" to oil in the Middle East which Thomas believes is because of the consumption by the citizens of the United States. The distortion that he was talking about has to do with the fact that he wants Congress to "put aside partisan politics". It does seem like an impossible task being as how Democrats and Republicans seem to have a hard time agreeing on anything. President Bush of course called for the reauthorization of the Patriot Act. He said that the state of the union is good but Thomas said that is could be better if we could ever have bipartisan cooperation. The President continued to warn that terrorists are still out there and "we will fight to keep" our freedom. By calling for 30,000 math and science teachers, Thomas said that Bush is "conceding" that math and science teaching in schools is "substandard". I think his summary of the state of the union address was good. He explained how optimistic Bush is and his "can do" behavior when it comes to things like the war on terrorism.

Senate Okays Gay Marriage Ban

2006-01-29T18:22:00.000-08:00

I can believe that the Senate would allow such a bill but the fact that it did is mind blowing. Why is it that they feel the need to pass a law so that same-sex marriages will not be recognized? All states should accept the full faith and credit clause because if not this could be just the beginning of something that will continue for years to come. First it'll start off with not recognizing same-sex marriages and that'll be followed by something even more ridiculous. We should put a stop to this now. In fact, it should have been stopped a long time ago. You can't help who you love and if that person happens to be the same gender you are, so be it. The government should not keep you from pursuing your happiness and marrying that person. By living in America shouldn't we be free to marry who we want regardless of who they are? Or is this no longer the land of the free?

Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Peace

2006-01-19T07:14:00.000-08:00

http://www.dailyprogress.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=CDP/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1128769373104
http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1128769401573&path=!news&s=1045855934842

The state of Virginia already has a ban on same-sex marriage so is it really necessary for an amendment that will make it so that Virginia will not have to recognize civil unions from other states? As long as two people love it other it shouldn't be a problem. Ignoring the marriage of two people just because it doesn't fit into the definition of what a marriage is isn't fair. They can't help it if they love someone that happens to be of the same gender. I think that anyone that wants to get married should have that right.

Bush Immigration Policy

2005-11-30T20:02:00.000-08:00

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/28/AR2005112801223.html

President Bush's new policy seems to cost a lot of money. He signed a bill for $139 million for a technology upgrade. That money could be used to help people that lost everything they ever had in a hurricane. Taking care of our citizens should be first, everything else should just fall into place behind it. I understand wanting to protect ours borders and it is something that needs to be taken care of. It's opening up a thousand new jobs while keeping America safe at the same time. The United States is made up of immigrants though and now we're doing everything possible to keep every single one that we can out? That's what it's come to now? All these different operations are taking place to make sure no one gets across and once they do they plan to ship them back as quickly as possible. People want to come here to make their dreams come true and to have a better life. They want their kids to be able to be American citizens and live the "American dream". Is that so wrong?

Detainees Policy

2005-11-15T10:15:00.000-08:00

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15981-2004May10.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/11/politics/11detain.html?th&emc=th

I think that the Senate should not have approved the limitations of rights of the detainees. Some of the detainees are innocent. Imagine being picked up and being held for years without a fair trial. Senator Lindsey Graham says that it's not right for the United States troops that are fighting to be sued in by our enemies. That is true BUT the soldiers shouldn't be over there in the first place. Many are losing their lives and for what? Nothing at all. Over 9,000 people are being held by United States authorities overseas. Within the last six months, three of the people held captive have died.
The Senate changed their minds quickly. At first, they voted with Senator John McCain to ban the abusive treatment of the detainees. Senator McCain wanted to stop the use of cruel and degrading treatment of the detainess, especially those in American custody. Some people believe that this is a step backward and that this type of treatment shouldn't be taking place by a country that was founded on certain principles. Senator Graham's bill was voted 49 to 42 only days after they had voted for Senator McCain's bill. So, to the 49 Senators who approved the bill I only have one question: Why?

Election

2005-11-13T18:20:00.000-08:00

Over all I think that the election went pretty well. I am glad that Kaine won because I believe that he will continue to do things the way Warner had. Hopefully, he will stick to his plans on education, taxes, health care, and all the other issues he addressed. Some people think that President Bush coming down here showing his support for Kilgore hurt Kilgore in the polls. Being as how many people don't like the way Bush has been dealing with the situations in the United States the past few months, I'd have to say that's a pretty good conclusion to come to.
I believe that an elected school board is also a good thing. Some people may not have like the people that were choosen to be on the school board and feel that they would have made a better decision.

Libby

2005-10-31T19:49:00.000-08:00

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/images/10/28/indictment.pdf

This shows what led to the case unfolding. From Joesph Wilson's trip to Africa to Libby talking to Judith Miller about Valerie Plame Wilson. It seems as though they could have just presented this to the Grand Jury and let them decide from this if Libby should be indicted or not. It shows the questions they should think about such as if Libby was aware of Valerie Plame Wilson being part of the CIA before he talked about it with others. It talks about the false statements that Libby made under oath in March 2004.

I think that Libby was aware of Valerie Palme Wilson being part of the CIA and purposely told the media about it. He lied under oath like he wouldn't get caught. He should know that it would eventually come out in the end.

Miers, Miers, Miers

2005-10-23T16:22:00.000-07:00

Every since President Bush selected Harriet Miers to be a Supreme Court judge the spotlight has been on them both. It's been on President Bush for not only naming his friend/personal lawyer, but also for naming someone that has no opinions on record. He held his first conference since May, not to talk about the hurricanes, but to talk about Miers' credentials. Does that seem just a little strange to anyone else? President Bush calls her a "pit bull in size 6 shoes." He also says that he knows her heart and what she believes. That may be good enough for him but I think that the Senate is going to need a little more to go on then that.
Even though Miers has never been a judge that should not automatically send up red flags because John Marshall and William Rehnquist had also never served on a bench before. So, what do we know about Miers? Well, she seems to be a very good tennis player, said that President Bush is the "most brilliant man" she ever met (no wonder he likes her so much), was the first woman partner in her firm, was the first female head of the state bar association, was engaged but never married, and is a born-again evangelical. Now, we just have to wait and see if she will make the cut.

Political Ads

2005-10-15T20:11:00.000-07:00

It seems as though Kilgore and Kaine spend most of their ads critizing each other or justifying what they did. Kilgore said that Kaine wouldn't sign a death penalty for Hitler but Kaine had an ad that says it may be against his beliefs but he will sign it because it would be his duty.
Potts ads on the other hand focus on what he would do if he were to be elected. His ads don't seem to be saying anything about Kaine or Kilgore. Kaine and Kilgore also don't have any ads that have anything to do with Potts. Maybe it's because he has less then 15% and wasn't allowed in the only televised debate.
Both Kilgore and Kaine need to follow Potts example and make their ads focus more on what they would do if they were to be elected. It seems as though they are fighting over a girl and trying to show her the other one's faults. It's actually getting old and I am personally tired of seeing them talk about something that the other one did twenty years ago. It's time to grow up fellas!

Debate

2005-10-10T06:38:00.000-07:00

The debate last night was interesting to say the least. It started off with Larry Sabato saying that Russell Potts had well below the needed 15% in order to debate. It seemed like he was just mad because of the law suit that Potts has against him. Then, once the debate got started, it seemed to be going smoothly. Both Kaine and Kilgore stuck to the topic and didn't stray from it too much. They both tried really hard to get their point across before the time ran out.
The candidates would be asked a question and would "beat around the bush" to use up the minute that they had. Sabato went back to the candidate and asked them to give a simple "yes" or "no" answer or to give a percentage. Even then, the candidates had a hard time giving a straight answer. Kaine said he'd try to keep his ads positive while Kilgore made no such statement.
In the end, I'd have to say that Kilgore did a better job. He seemed to state his plan better then Kaine did.

DeLay Indicted

2005-10-02T17:51:00.000-07:00

DeLay did not have to describe the prosecctor as a "partisan fanatic" If he's innocent like he says he is then he has nothing to worry about. He obviously has a major impact on the Republicans since they changed a law just incase he would get indicted. They changed it back because of all the criticism they got from it. DeLay raised a lot of money for Republicans but the evidence of the money coming from six companies and other money going to candidates doesn't look too good for him. He could spend up to two years in prison which is bad but it doesn't seem too bad.

9 Justices, 2 Laws, and a Playmate

2005-10-02T17:26:00.000-07:00

I think that limiting the amount of money spent on campaigns is a good thing. This way, someone that's equally as qualifed to do the job but has less money still has a chance to win the election. If chief justice John Roberts does belive in the precedents that have already been set, then he should not want to end the campaign finance law.
Limits on the ability to buy political campaign ads is also a good thing for the same reason, less money but still an equal chance.
Anna Nicole Smith was married to J. Howard Marshall so she should be allowed to get some of the money he left behind. Even though, when she was born, he was 63. I guess love knows no age.

Katrina's Silver Lining

2005-09-14T10:04:00.000-07:00

I believe that David Brooks is right when he says that this is a chance to do something about poverty. When New Orleans is rebuilt, it should be a complete opposite of the way it was before. No one should have to live on the streets and everyone should have a job. The schools should be better and the students should be more encouraged to graduate. If the Gautreaux program worked, the same thing can happen again but only this time it'll be in New Orleans. Since the girls did better, they should make sure the boys are encouraged to want to suceed. They shouldn't build the same house and let the exact same people move back in because it would be like it was before. Like Brooks said, "Let's not blow it."

Government Response to Hurricane Katrina

2005-09-11T20:39:00.000-07:00

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9287434/

Confusion is what comes to my mind when I read about what was going on in the White House after Hurricane Katrina hit. President Bush and many others were on vacation while people's houses were being destroyed and others were losing their lives.

From the article, it seems that Bush is surrounded by a bunch of "yes men". No one is telling him that he doesn't need to be on a vacation like a normal family man since he is the president. In the article, it stated that Bush had no idea of how serious the damage in New Orleans was until two days later. It seemed like everyone outside the White House was aware of this problem though. So, why is Bush being shielded from reality like a impressionable child? Shouldn't he know what's going on in his own country and to the people of the United States?

Gas Prices Webquest

2005-09-06T07:28:00.000-07:00

Gas Prices Webquest
Names Debi and Shanice
Mr. Daly
9/2/05

1. Research the impact of Hurricane Katrina on gasoline prices. Why did it cause an increase in gas prices? What are some problems that this increase may cause? What are some things that are being done to control costs?

Hurricane Katrina caused an increase in gas prices because it caused power outages. It also knocked out two major on-shore pipelines. Some problems that it may cause are that there may be a reduced supply of oil.

2. Research current gasoline prices across the country. Write a summary on why some states or areas have higher gasoline prices than others. Think about the area's location and population, does that affect their gasoline prices? Include current prices in your explanation.

If the demand for gas is high, then the price is going to be higher. In places like Los Angles, the lowest price is $2.81. On the East Coast, in Philadelphia, the lowest gas price is $3.00. In South Dakota, their lowest price is $2.92. The gas prices also depend on which part of the country you are in.

3. Describe the changes in gasoline prices in the last fifty years.

From 1950 to 1970 the price of gas declined. In 1975 and 1980, the prices jumped up from $1.80 to $2.59. Then during 1985 to 1995 the prices went down again. The years following 2002, the gas prices continued to rise.

4. Compare gas prices around the world. Do certain regions have lower prices than others? Which countries have the highest prices and which have the lowest? How does the current prices in the United States compare to the rest of the world?

Certain places do have lower gas prices then others. In the Netherlands, the gas is $6.48 but in Venezuela, the gas is only $0.12 per gallon. The price may depend on if the country has their own resources of gas. Some countries prices are three times are high as the prices in the United States. Other countries prices are half of what people are paying in the United States.

5. Write down or copy/paste the URL of the websites you take information from so you can quickly go back to it if you need to to prove your point. Keep a list of the websites you visited to hand in.

http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/

http://www.gasbuddy.com

http://money.howstuffworks.com/gas-price1.htm

"My Private Idaho"

2005-08-30T06:42:00.000-07:00

Maureen Dowd had the right idea when she wrote her article. What kind of president is in office for five years and has been on vacation for 339 days? A bad one. The fact that he asked a nominee for the Supreme Court how much he exercises makes it seem like he's taking the presidency for a joke. It's interesting that he only brings up the number of people who died in the war when he's using it to help his purpose. He says "We will finish the task that they gave their lives for." When he says "we" he actually means sons and daughters of people he's never met before. Then when a grieving mother wants to meet with him again, he acts like he can't take a few minutes out of his exercise schedule to meet with her. I understand that people need to exercise but the president needs to do his job. He has a $3,000 bike. Why? There is no point in having a bike that cost that much money. He could have donated that money to a worthy cause. I bet that thought never crossed his mind though. His daughters aren't over there risking their lives everyday. Three more years.

Peace Moms

2005-08-28T18:51:00.000-07:00

http://www.dailyprogress.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=CDP%2FMGArticle%2FCDP_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031784507190&path=!news!assembly

Last Wednesday, people gathered to protest the war and to show their support for Cindy Sheehan who is in Texas to talk with President Bush.
I think that President Bush should meet with her again because her son died because of a war that he started. I also think that Shawn Gregory was correct in saying that Bush should be in Washington. He needs to continue planning and find a way to bring the troops home soon. He doesn't have his daughters over there so why should other people have there kids over there?

Test

2005-08-25T06:51:00.000-07:00

"06"