President lost in our government vortex

Our President Barack Obama is libertarian defending an activist drone program.  It seem the head man in charge of this country has been suck in to vast government vortex. It seems like Obama is losing control with the website crash,and the surveillance chiefs who were spying on private phone lines of America's allies. Obama has been angered with has went on in last few weeks, he will  be re-examining how the National Security Agency decides to target friendly leaders, what we get from it and why we need it at all. I feel like Obama is over his head. With the situation that happen most presidents are isolated.  There is a miscommunication at some level, if he didn't know that the website was down it probably happen at a bottom level and where hidden. Why does the president have to play games just to get answer. The irony in the situation is that  4 out 5 people have little to no trust in our government. I feel that our president should know everything that is going on in the government, even if it is little problems.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/29/opinion/borger-obama-government-faith/index.html?c=&page=2

Polarity? It's a problem.

     What is becoming increasingly evident in today's politics is the ever-increasing polarity that is dividing democrats and republicans. Our lesson on Monday in class was very interesting due to the fact that it really opened my eyes to something that I'd been aware of but hadn't really thought about. The polarity between Republicans and Democrats in Congress is absolutely ridiculous and is one of the causes of the recent govrenment shutdown. Not only is Congress extremely polarized, but also the American population as a whole has succumbed to this polarity. Bipartisanship between the parties, what may have been an admirable trait amongst politicians during the mid-20th century, is all but extinct. During the counter-culture movement of the 1960s there was also a large division, or polarity, on college campuses (such that looks similar to the polarity in Congress the past couple of years.) This division basically consisted  of the extreme leftists who looked to separate themselves from the rest on campus to make their point, and thereby created the resulting polarity: by using their extremism to criticize and alienate the other side. This effect, according to the article, is the problem in Congress today; except the main difference is the extremism by the Republican party. The government shutdown provides the perfect example for Republican extremism in this day and age. A group of Repubclians (the Tea party, to be specific) opposed the passing of the Health Care bill and took a stand to not allow it to pass even if the government shut down. Other less extreme Republicans were forced to follow these more extreme Republicans creating a united extremist front. This partisanship is not what founded the American government and will need to cease in order for the government to continue to work in a conveniet fashion. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0406.glastris.html

Racial Profiling in America

Racial profiling of african americans and hispanics, while shopping, has become a large issue in the news recently. Barney's New York, a chain of luxury department stores, stated several months ago that they had a noticeable amount of items missing in their stores in the recent weeks. So, they made a decision to start taking chances and tightening down with their security program, and the result of this decision has been numerous reports of racial profiling from blacks and hispanics. The case that I want to discuss is the case with Mr. Trayvon Christain. Mr. Christian had purchased a Salvatore Ferragamo belt at Barneys. Shortly after, he was stopped on the street by officers that claimed that there was no way that he was able to afford that belt. Then, he was handcuffed and taken to the precinct where he was held for two hours too long. This situation is completely idiotic. Nobody, not even a police officer, has the right to stop someone without probable cause and arrest them simply from perception. I am surprised that events like these are not still being protested in the streets, because these officers obstructed this man's freedom for no reason. As a result of this, Mr. Christain is suing the store and the city in the Supreme Court. This is just another obvious example that this country is not equal. Minorities are constantly profiled and unjustly accused of crimes. This injustice must end. It has been going on for way too long. If a man does not have the right to go buy a belt without being stopped and arrested in this country, then the values of this country are being misconstrued by the officials that are supposed to be doing everything that they can to ensure the freedom of innocent citizens.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/30/nyregion/black-shoppers-at-barneys-and-macys-say-they-were-profiled-by-security.html

Filling in the Vacant Supreme Court seat

        President Obama has nominated Patricia Ann Millet to fill in the vacant Supreme Court seat left by Chief Justice John G. The Republicans plan to block the nomination and the Democrats have threatened to reopen the debate to limit the Filibuster. Republicans argue the current Supreme Court Justices can handle the workload. The Democrats argue it is the “president’s right to fill vacancies on the court” and the Republicans do not have reasonable argument to deny the president’s right.

       The nominations have become polarized to where the Republicans are trying to prevent the president from filling in the vacant Supreme Court seat at all cost. It’s not enough that the president’s nomination is candidate that is bipartisan it is the fact that they do not want the Democrats to appoint another member to the Supreme Court. The type of polarization the in this case is emotional attachments and aversion because republicans do not want another Supreme Court justice appointed by the Democrat president. Republicans should get over it and vote for Ms. Millett because she is bipartisan and we need more Supreme Court justices like her.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/30/us/politics/between-democrats-and-a-push-for-filibuster-change-one-nominee.html?_r=0

Obamacare gets more headline news

With all of the American population being affected by this Affordable Care Act in more ways then one, now it's starting to affect Health Services Secretary Sebelius and the company behind this Obamacare. There is no shock that Obamacare is making more negative headlines in America's media.  Now the news is that Secretary Sebelius, like President Obama, is defending all of the negative criticism coming with the ACA. The most negative news in Obamacare, minus the website not working, is that in the ACA is making other insurance plans ineligible under Obamacare. Now that goes against what President Obama and the Senate Democrats have said all along.  They have constantly stated and defending the ACA saying that under the ACA, Americans are still able to keep their existing medical insurance if they have it already with no problem.  But is that really true? With thousands, yes I said thousands, of cancellations of the other medical plans its starting to seem like Obamacare is NOT keeping its word on being able to keep other insurances. Sebelius said that its only because of the cheaper plans being under the ACA. That is only true because of the ACA passing it makes having other medical insurance impossible to keep because of the higher cost.  People that have had insurance for years are now faced with the decision to keep it and pay much higher cost or be FORCED to move to Obamacare, simply because they are not able to afford it. With political polarization clear on Obamacare, the Republican ruled House is making it clear on their standing and taking full advantage of this hearing.  But no matter what negative criticism this ACA gets, Obama and Sebelius keep defending their beliefs and stating that all of the rumors of it not being true is "simply not true". Although they are keeping their belief on the other insurance even though the statistics go against it, they are actually saying sorry for the issues with the websites.  Sebelius stated that "You deserve better. I apologize. I'm accountable to you for fixing these problems." I guess only time will tell. Lastly, the House Republicans are now stating that Secretary Sebelius needs to step down and some order needs to be placed to fix these issues.  Senator Alexander from Tennessee stated " Mr. President, at some point there has to be accountability. Expecting this secretary to be able to fix what she hasn't been able to fix during the last three-and-a-half years is unrealistic."  Is he right? Is this the time, the issues, and the money worth it? Personally, all of this time and money is not worth something that hasn't worked from day 1.

A new law in Texas restricting abortions has been ruled unconstitutional in federal courts. The controversial law gained national headlines earlier this year after democratic state senator Wendy Davis made an unsuccessful attempt to filibuster the law. If enacted, the law would have forced several abortion clinics to shut down, and would have negatively affected the health services of several thousand women. In response to this federal ruling, Texas’s Attorney General has requested that the federal appeals court reestablish the abortion restrictions.

I’m a bit surprised they banned the restrictions in the first place. Federal courts have upheld abortion restrictions in the past and this seems like an issue that should fall under states’ rights. Although I’m on the prochoice side of the abortion argument, I feel like this is an overreach of federal power. This is an issue of state policy that only affects businesses in the state and the healthcare of members of the state. This ruling falls in line with a long history of shifting power from states to the federal government. And in this case Texas cannot even operate its own healthcare policies anymore. Although the restrictions were unfair and damaging to many women in the state, that does not make it a national issue. If Texas wants to make harmful laws then so be it and it’s up to Texans to change and fix their mistakes.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/29/us-usa-abortion-texas-idUSBRE99S0ZF20131029

Just last week, I read a blog post by a student that talked about an article that said Obamacare was really costing Americans money, it was bad for the economy, etc. An article that was obviously from the right. In an article written by Geoffrey Cowley of MSNBC, it was an article advertised to shoot down the right's latest bashing of Obamacare. Yet when I clicked on the article, its title was very negative to start. "Millions will lose their old health plans under Obamacare- and most will come out ahead." An article name like that immediately didn't bode well for the left's argument. Throughout the article it had many negative examples of Obamacare while not providing as strong counter-examples to shed a positive light on Obamacare. One example that stood out to me was one made at the end of the article talking about two individuals. One was a real estate agent who would have to pay almost $200 extra to have the bottom-tier plan under the Affordable Healthcare Act. And yet when a positive counter-example was made, they said that for every person like that, there is probably a so-so and then gave the person's bio and why it helped them.

This article not only shows possible negatives for Obamacare that the Republicans showed, it also showed that Obama's promises of everyone getting to keep their health plans if they already have one were false promises. There is enough political  polarization as it is with each side bashing the other and giving little facts to what is actually going on. Yes the government shut down created great polarization within the government as well as with the American people, however polls have shown that the Republican party as a whole is still lower in approval rating than the Democrats. However, if people learn that they might have to spend more money just to keep in line with the law, that Democrat approval rating might just hit Republican levels within the next year.


http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/cut-rate-premiums-cut-rate-care

Senators warn Obama before Iraq leader's visit

WASHINGTON — As Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki of Iraq headed to Washington on Tuesday, an influential group of senators sent a strongly worded letter to President Obama warning that Mr. Maliki’s “mismanagement” of Iraqi politics had contributed to the surge of violence there.Mr. Maliki, who is scheduled to meet with Mr. Obama on Friday, has signaled that he wants the United States to provide sophisticated weapons, including Apache attack helicopters, so that the Iraqi government can fight Al Qaeda in Iraq and other insurgent groups.

 

The letter, signed by ranking Democratic as well as Republican lawmakers, sought to put Mr. Maliki on notice that continued American support for Iraq would depend heavily on his willingness to share power with his nation’s Sunni and Kurdish minorities.Mr. Maliki, a Shiite politician who became prime minister in 2006 with the support of the American ambassador to Baghdad, has often been accused of being sectarian and authoritarian. Those tendencies, the senators wrote, made Iraq more fertile ground for insurgents who have been mounting attacks with increasing frequency.“This failure of governance is driving many Sunni Iraqis into the arms of Al Qaeda in Iraq and fueling the rise of violence,” the letter said.

 

Earlier on Tuesday, two of the senators spoke angrily in separate interviews about Mr. Maliki’s failure to unify the competing factions in Iraq. “He’s got a lot of work to do in terms of pulling together diverse elements of his country,” said Senator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat who heads the Armed Services Committee. “He’s not done a particularly good job of it.”Mr. Levin also criticized Mr. Maliki for acquiescing in, if not facilitating, Iran’s efforts to supply weapons to President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, using flights through Iraqi airspace. “They’ve allowed overflights, Iranian planes, to supply Syria,” Mr. Levin said.

 

Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, the senior Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, which is to meet with Mr. Maliki on Wednesday, was even more critical of the Iraqi leader. “What he’s done is create a situation where the population is more accepting of what Al Qaeda is doing there because of his lack of inclusiveness,” Mr. Corker said.

 

The other senators who signed the letter were John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, both Republicans who have long taken a strong interest in Iraq; Robert Menendez, the New Jersey Democrat who is chairman of the Senator Foreign Relations Committee; and James M. Inhofe, a Republican from Oklahoma who is the ranking minority member of the Armed Services Committee.In expressing alarm over the rising number of bombings and the deteriorating security situation in Iraq, the senators also appeared to chide Mr. Obama for not being more outspoken about developments there.

 

The letter emphasized that Mr. Maliki’s visit was an opportunity for Mr. Obama to “re-engage with the American people about the continuing strategic importance of Iraq.”

 

The last American troops left Iraq at the end of 2011 under an agreement signed by President George W. Bush and Mr. Maliki. The United States and Iraq have signed an agreement calling for cooperation on security and economic issues. But critics say that such cooperation has never fully developed.

 

In their letter, the senators urged the president to step up American efforts to help Iraq’s security force to fight terrorist groups, especially through the increased sharing of intelligence.

 

The senators stopped short of saying that such support should be withheld if Mr. Maliki did not adopt a more inclusive approach in governing. But they warned that the degree of American support for security assistance and arms sales would be influenced by Mr. Maliki’s “governance strategy.”

Bill Nelson Backs ENDA, Leaving Just Two Democratic Holdouts

Bill Nelson, Democratic Senator of Florida just signed on and became a cosponsor of the Employee Non Discrimination Act. ENDA is now being brought to the table "which would bar workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. It is already illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, nationality, religion, age or disability." I think it's about time that this is being brought to the table. I hope that this pushes through the Senate and gets passed. There is no reason that anybody should be denied a job or fired simply because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. The point of a job is to get work done. Who you are doesn't interfere with what work you have to do. You can't do a job any less simply because of your sexual orientation or gender identity, therefore, since it doesn't interfere with work it shouldn't be an issue.




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/29/bill-nelson-enda_n_4173328.html?1383053428

Rep. Scott Tipton- He isn't pleasing his district

In the days and weeks following the end of the government shutdown, Republicans have been facing certain backlash with the American public. Republican Congressman from Colorado, Scott Tipton, is a prime example of this. During a town hall meeting last week, Tipton was victim to very angry constituents. The attendees of the meeting accused Tipton of being just another self-interested congressman, one person even yelling "you don't hold America hostage". A shouting match eventually erupted within the town hall between attendees, with Tipton having very little control over his constituents. Another significant issue was Tipton's opposition to overhauling immigration. This created further problems, and the Latino population was in an uproar.
This is a significant example of how congressmen must never forget to keep their constituents happy. Now, Tipton faces vulnerability during the next election as his approval rating has subsequently shrunk. I'm not sure if it is right to blame just a single congressman for the shutdown, but the people certainly wanted to make a point, in which they did rather efficiently. The American people may have been affected, but the Republican party is now the real victim of the government shutdown.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/29/scott-tipton-government-shutdown_n_4173823.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

Is there too much Media and Polarization?

Andrew Rudalevige makes a point that President Obama's speech on Syria was criticized by the media with scathing terms like "inept, incompetent, feckless", but still it has not changed his poll numbers.  Rudalevige examines the past history of the U.S. when presidents were rarely criticized and notes that today, the President is constantly put in a negative light.  He states that people do not take notice anymore. Rudalevige also notes the impact of polarization on both parties. He notices that Democrats always approve of everything President Obama does, while Republicans always disapprove.  Rudalevige states “the public has many cable channels to choose the news and opinions that they prefer".

            Rudalevige is right that there is numerous news channels on 24 hours a day and the conservative or liberal leanings are obvious, but it does not matter to the public.  Many people watch the same news station and do not investigate on their own whether the reporting is fair or biased, or even if the facts are true.  Many people react to the news instead of investigating or searching for the truth.  It is amazing how often the news media repeats a certain statement over and over, and soon the general public believes it even if it is proven false later. It is true that the news media is not afraid to criticized the President today, but in President Obama's case when he said that he did not know about "Benghazi terror threats, the IRS scandal against conservatives, the NSA spying, Fast and Furious giving out guns, the problems with Obamacare web page and his inept speech about Syria", he gets a pass, his poll numbers are still high. It makes you wonder.

http://themonkeycage.org/2013/09/12/the-media-pounds-the-president-does-it-matter/

The Filabuster: Senate's Default Answer

    More problems surface in the Senate due to President Obama's recent nomination of Patricia Ann Millets, a Washington lawyer, to the Supreme Court.  Mr. Obama has the support of fellow Democrats, but, once again, problems have surfaced due to heavy Republican opposition.  Republicans do not see why the government should pay for any more justices when the workload within the Supreme Court is already so small.  John Cornyn, a Senator from Texas, highlights his party's intentions with the simple statement, "we intend to stop it." By now, America knows what that means... the filibuster.  In order for Millets to overcome this recently publicized "f" word, she needs 60 votes total, meaning 5 would have to come from the Republican party.  If she cannot receive these 5 votes,  Senior Democrats say that there is no other option than to try to change the Senate's rules on filibusters.  

   Though it was once rare, the filibuster has become the default solution of the Senate,  shutting out every bill that doesn't have the unrealistic 60% support.  It has grown into a controversial issue due to the undemocratic power that gives to the minority, but I honestly don't see any sort of solution in the near future.  While many ambitious Democrats aim to fix this element, they are clearly forgetting a gigantic obstacle: the 60% support that would be needed... a number that is completely unobtainable in today's heavily divided Senate.  While I see the need for a change regarding the filibuster, it is very unlikely that such a large agreement would be made in a time that is underlined for strongly divided parties.  

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/30/us/politics/between-democrats-and-a-push-for-filibuster-change-one-nominee.html?ref=politics

Analysis: On healthcare, spying, questions on what Obama knew and when

I read the article Analysis: On healthcare, spying, questions on what Obama knew and when.  This article discusses both "Obamacare" and the NSA spying on European countries.  More specifically, it discusses how President Obama seems to not know what is going on in his own administration every time something goes wrong.

Republicans and the public are ripping Obama for him saying for years that "If you like your healthcare plan, you'll be able to keep your healthcare plan, period," and "no one will take it away, no matter what," when discussing people wanting to keep their current healthcare plans, this isn't the truth.  The healthcare plan actually forces "those who buy their own insurance on the open market" to have their plans cancelled and "replaced with higher-cost alternatives" if the "policies...don't meet minimum standards of the Affordable Care Act".  In defense of this criticism the White House said that "Obama had misrepresented the healthcare law for years" which is just their way of denying responsibility for anything bad that happens because there is a very very slim chance that a Columbia and Harvard Law Graduate who is the leader of the free world failed to understand any part of a bill that he signed into law and has the title "Obamacare".  For a second lets pretend that he didn't understand his own law before he pushed it onto the public, if he didn't understand the law then he clearly isn't doing his job correctly and has no business running the country.  On the other hand if he did understand the bill and is now lying and saying that he didn't he and his entire administration are misleading the entire country.

Then there is the topic of the NSA "spying" on European countries.  The NSA has been collecting records about European country citizens for years with the assistance of each countries' intelligence agency for the purpose of preventing terrorist attacks which it has successfully done.  The only problem with this is that some of those spied on were leaders of U.S. ally countries such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel.  President Obama is once again denying any knowledge of the NSA spying on European countries and their leaders.  If this is true, it is completely unacceptable because as Republican Representative Peter King, "a key member of the Homeland Security Committee" said "if the President did not know" then it "raises very serious questions about what he's doing as chief executive. The fact he would be going into negotiations and discussions and meetings with Angela Merkel or French leaders -- or any leaders for that matter -- and not be aware that there was surveillance going on of the private phone calls, to me either something is definitely wrong in his administration or he just has a totally hands-off attitude".

In conclusion, I'm not sure how you can run the most powerful country in the world and never seem to know what is going on anytime something goes wrong.

Political Polarization at Its Peak? Not All Agree

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304384104579141884050712874


Political Polarization at Its Peak? Not All Agree

    The recent raise of the debt ceiling according to The Wall Street Journal has shown to the public the

 topic of Political Polarization. Polarization, in the world of politics, occurs when public opinion goes to 

two extremes, and there is no real middle ground or moderates. A committee was made to help the 

Democrats and Republicans come to some sort of understanding, so everyone is more prepared next 

time the country runs out of money. This is shows how the country's politics are more diverse and 

polarized than ever. "We probably have more division now between parties than we have had at any 

other period in history," said Jason Matthew Roberts, a political scientist at the University of North 

Carolina. We might be the more polarized today but, researchers say that this is a norm for us in the 

United States. We have always had polarization because of strong public views on both sides. So my 

question is will Political Polarization ever seize to exist due to parties trying to work out their 

differences? Or due to other parties arising with less extreme views?

Obamacare could have been more percise.

A recent fox News article states that house Democratic Leader- Steny Hoyer admits that Obamacare should have been “more precise” in acknowledging the risk that some Americans would lose their current insurance plans. He admitted this after a document from 2010 surfaced. That document predicted millions might be dropped by their providers, which explains why thousands of Americans have been getting letters, notifying them that their insurance plan has been cancelled. Hoyer goes on to say that officials knew some of the health plans would not qualify under the recent Obamacare regualtions. “The overall message to the public was accurate- just not precise enough” (Hoyer).

Like the article said, this gives a whole new meaning to Nancy Pelosi’s remark in which she said, "we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it." If a plan does not meet the requirements of Obamacare, the people are kicked off their plan and forced onto another. These plans tend to be more expensive and cover things that certain people do not need to worry about. For instance, I don’t think an 80 year old needs to have pregnancy coverage. The people should be able to be on the plans they chose for them, I’m sure they chose it for a reason. If they wanted more coverage then they would have gone with it in the first place. In 2009, President Obama said, "If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what." I hate to address the elephant in the room, but this is certainly not the case.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/29/pols-push-keep-your-health-plan-act-as-files-show-govt-knew-millions-could-lose/#

Obama Administration warned about Problems with Healthcare Website

A CNN report on Tuesday, October 29, reported that the Obama administration was indeed given warnings that the new Healthcare.gov website would not be ready for the October 1 launch date. The website contractor CGI said that the website had many open risks and issues. On October 1, the new Affordable Care Act, or more commonly known as Obamacare, went into effect. Many problems surfaced quickly after launch and the most notable problem being the website.  The issues with the website have still not been resolved. Cheryl Campbell, a Senior Vice President for CGI told the Obama Administration on October 25 that "no one ever gets enough time for testing." If the Obama Administration was informed of these problems, why did they choose to launch it anyway?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/29/politics/obamacare-warning/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Media Fragmentation to Blame For Polarization?

An interesting article by James Carville posted on TheHill.com offered up a new perspective when analyzing the causes of polarization. Carville believes that the extreme fragmentation of the media, particularly news sources, is largely to blame for the ever-increasing polarization of the public, and consequently, congress. He stated, "Today, conservatives can get all their information from conservative outlets, and liberals can get all their information from liberal outfits. And you can spend your whole life never being challenged, never having to hear or think about or confront viewpoints that are different from your own." Carville points out an undeniable truth that people are predispositioned to tune into news channels that reinforce their personal policy preferences. When people hear their ideals being justified in the media, they are personally strengthened in their ideologies and are then less likely to confront opposing opinions with any real consideration. The public can watch all the news they want still remaining uninformed. This is because, "Instead of taking all this information and using it as a window to the entire world, a big part of the media industry now exists in large part to confirm your beliefs. People have figured out that there’s a lot of money to be made telling you that you were right in the first place. It makes both sides more dug in," according to Carville. One thing individuals should carefully consider is whether their news source is selling opinions or providing facts.

http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/james-carville/328731-polarization-in-media-worsens-partisanship

Elections Upon Us

With all the ruckus of Government shutdown, raising the debt ceiling, and debates over Obamacare, the 2014 Midterm elections have been overlooked by many.  With such recent and major debates happening in the government, the 2014 elections have turned into a cutthroat battle ground between Democrats and Republicans.  The democrats, standing on the platform of blaming the Republican "Tea Party" members are working hard to replace the "Extreme" Republicans, and close the gap on the Republicans majority in the house.  The Republicans in return, argue the glitches of Obamacare.  With a weak website backing Obamacare, making it hard to navigate through the process, the Republicans have a strong argument that the Government has no belonging in the healthcare department.  Overall, both parties feel threatened by their opponents, but likewise, just as threatening to them.  With the 2014 elections soon to come, it will be very interesting as to which party holds the stronger argument and more support.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/shutdown-obamacare-2014-midterm-election-98989.html?hp=t1_3

Hatocracy

New York’s #Obama-care ripping old people away from their doctors.

 The Obama Care to me seems that is not going to be a good a idea the story I'm hearing are saying you keep your own health care and if you don't have Obama care you wont be able to do some things you want to do. Some healthcare canceling the plans with people because the Obama health care is not a fit. The government is another big reason why people are upset. I thought this health plan was for people who didn't have a plan if you don't need it you don't have to be apart of it . Some people don't want the government to have all of their information and be in the business so why are the force people to close the health cover and ripping people away from their doctors. This article and video is about how old people or any body are not being able to keep their doctor and they have to change to who they want to go to because the health plan. You should be able to choice your own doctor or keep your doctor you been going to they should make some type of agreement. You want to feel comfortable with somebody that is taking care of you and trying to help you survival. Doctors are being remove and they are angry with that. They are their to help that's their job i don't understand why they are getting remove and having cuts. This is to help the world and the citizens not make us angry and piss us off. This is a free country we should be able to choose who we want to doctor & help us. The government shouldn't be able to pick who they want because they want to. Some doctors don't take their job serious anyway they just do it because they are getting a wonderful pay cut this is my opinion i think they shouldn't get removed and we should be able to chose who. Don't matter if you young, old or bout to die. I disagree http://www.redstate.com/2013/10/28/obamacare-new-york-andrew-cuomo-medicare-advantage/

Was Alan Grayson being too radical?

Recent comments made by Democratic Congressman of Florida, Alan Grayson, has stirred up some attention in the media. Grayson's recent campaign includes ideas that portray the Tea Party as the KKK and how the two groups have uncanny similarities. He apparently made the initial comment during an interview on MSNBC's "Politics Nation With Al Sharpton", stating that the Tea Party is "no more popular than the Klan".
His choice of words have greatly angered former Republican Representative of Florida, Allen West. He called for Grayson to retract his "demeaning" campaign and to apologize for his use of harsh language. This comes after plenty of remarks made by various Tea Partiers about Obama being a Nazi and Communist and repeatedly using the "N" word to demean the president. This is highly relatable to our class in regards to the effects of polarization in our government. Extremities are becoming quite the commonality and use of heavy and offensive language to make a point is almost turning into a norm. The effects of polarization leads to political gridlock and countless hours of filibustering and bickering; something this country does not need at this time. Despite the government shutdown being over, there is still a long way to go.
I do not personally agree with Alan Grayson's harsh tactics, as it puts him on the same level as the extremists on the other side. However, I'm sure his comments were to prove a point, not offend anybody.

Allen West Unironically Condemns Inflammatory Remark

Effects of the Shutdown

      As the government shutdown finally draws to a close we can take the time to see in how many ways the shutdown affected our every day way of life. Sure, it shouldn't really affect us normal citizens as much as one would think. The government shutting down seems like much more of a big deal than it actually really is; however, there are certain aspects of life that a lack of a government most definitely affects. One of the obvious results is that national parks shut down, which has had a large effect on foreigners vacationing and weddings in the Capitol, you know, important things. The Federal Drug and Food administration was not working either, meaning that everything from eggs to fresh berries were not checked for dangerous bacteria or diseases. The Equal Employment opportunity commission was not in commission to offer aid to those suffering from discriminatio from their racist bosses. Furthermore, such cites as the u.S. census bureau and NASA maps were down as as they were parts of the shutdown government.
     Basically, these government aids that have been shutdown for the past couple of weeks will be back online. For those in need of Federal aid this is an extremely positive motion. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/18/government-shutdown-cost_n_4121906.html

Pork in the Debt Deal

The bill to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling included a considerable amount of pork. “The five most surprising provisions in the debt deal” are: a river project, flood recovery funds, late senator’s widow, other winners, and same pay for congress. The river project is a dam and locks on the Ohio River that “flows through Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell’s home state of Kentucky” which will cost $2.2 Billion. The flood recovery funds will receive $450 million for rebuilding projects in Colorado which surpasses the limit of “$100 million for the Department of Transportation as allowed in the Disaster Relief Appropriation Act.” Some believe it is unnecessary to give Senator Frank Lautenberg’s widow a death benefit of a year’s worth salary of $174,000 when he had $59 million as of 2011. Other agencies received more money like agencies that fight fires that can now get as much as $636 million. Unfortunately for members of congress, they do not get a raise, maybe because they are making $174,000 a year.   

            I agree with Republican senator John McCain who said, “It shows that there are people in this body who are willing to use any occasion to get an outrageous pork-barrel project done at the cost of millions of dollars. It’s disgusting.” As much as we pork- Barrel projects they are part of our politics and they are not going anywhere. Congress men’s goal is to be reelected and they will do anything keep their job. Now senator McConnell can say to his constituents, “I fought for the $2.2 million to finish the dam and locks.” Well senator McConnell is defiantly using his incumbency advantages. I think the window should receive the money however; she should donate the $147,000 to some nonprofit organization. Members of congress are asking for a raise when they shut the government, it is unbelievable.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/17/politics/new-debt-deal-pork/

Obamacare problems already making headlines

Trouble in paradise? After the Democrats successfully launched the new site of Obamacare, there have been more issues then ever expected.  The new site has not had the expected applicants that it was projected to have.  But that is not stopping Obama and the liberal congressmen from pushing this new medical care on Americans. With the website malfunctions hurting the number of applicants, Obama came out with a video statement defending the issues.  He said "the website has not worked as smoothly as it was supposed to, but we we're gonna get it fixed. The Affordable Care Act is much more than a website." As an outsider, it seems like the House Republicans are right, this is not what Americans need. Marco Rubio stated in a TV interview, with Fox News, after the shut down was lifted that he believes they are going to have to come back and kill this Affordable Care Act so the issues stop. There are too many "small print problems". Seems to me like the shut down in Congress and the budget issues were not worth the Obamacare act.  Now the Democrats in Congress are scrambling around setting up meetings and constantly defending the issues all because of the issues the website has created. Personally, I think our congressmen have much more important issues to attain to then the website issues of Obamacare. The more unsettling part is that Obama is still getting political money off this site. Is he really about the actual Affordable Care Act or just making sure that he is raising the money he needs? Only time will tell.


Obamacare

Americans are dumb?

According to a report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Americans are extremely unintelligent compared to countries around the world. One in six Americans scored poorly on the examination, when only one in twenty people in Japan scored poorly. Literacy was scored very poor, and the problem-solving section was very poor or worse. America has continued to take this issue lightly. As a country, we need to begin taking education more seriously. For one, if we begin to make schools more rigorous, we will begin to more effectively train the next generation for the growing economic world. Many people wonder why our government and economy is in such turmoil. I want to argue that it is the lack of urgency on America's behalf concerning education. America needs to implement trades at every high school, so young Americans will always have a plan B, even if they don't find a passion for the available trades. We need to provide educations where all graduates can be beneficial to society in multiple ways. Congress has failed us in it's funding for education. The sequester earlier this year cut an abundance of money from education. Our government needs to get their heads out of their asses and start to realize what is important for our country to continue to thrive. If we do not take the appropriate steps to improve this issue, in 20 years, America will be at the bottom of the country in many aspects.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/23/opinion/the-united-states-falling-behind.html?_r=0&hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1382537255-VBRyC1sE26p8wEM1UhdrpQ

Government Official "Subtweets"

     Adding to the list of jokes regarding Washington lately, Jofi Joseph, a member the White House National Security Staff, was removed from his NSC nuclear non-proliferation team after publicly bashing the foreign policy community and revealing secrets of the Obama administration for over two years on the social networking site, Twitter.  Through the mysterious username: "@natsecwonk," he posted tweets insulting  the intelligence and appearance of countless White House and State Department officials such as Secretary of State John Kerry, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes.  Even riskier, though, were the multiple comments  made doubting the official reports regarding the Attacks in Benghazi on September 11, 2012.
    Joseph's actions are the epitome of unprofessional, therefore he was more than justly fired.  While many people in the comments of this post tried to defend his protection under the First Amendment of the Constitution,  it clearly has nothing to do with preventing the loss of his job.  While he is legally allowed to express himself in whatever way he wants,  his employer has an equal right to fire him if it's necessary for the general good. This is obviously even more true for government officials. With the majority of the nation currently displeased with the government at this time, it's not for the good for the overall well-being of the country to add fuel to the fire by spreading rumors that falsely claim corruption within the government.  Bottom line is, you can't insult your boss and get away with it, not even the First Amendment can save you there. 









http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/22/white-house-official-fired-for-tweeting-under-fake-name1.html

Supreme Court to Get Reporter's Privilege Plea

     This article, by Josh Gerstein, tells of a reporter who interviewed someone for information about a CIA operation to provide Iran with flawed nuclear designs as part of an effort to set back that country's alleged nuclear weapons program. The CIA wants to indict the person who leaked the information. The reporter however is refusing to testify and would, "rather go to jail than reveal his sources." The Supreme Court is now reviewing details and will make a decision as to whether or not reporters have the right not to reveal their sources.
     This case could be monumental since it pertains to the First and Fifth Amendments. If the Supreme Court says that reporters do not have the right to with-hold their sources then it begs the questions, "What if that ruling violates certain individuals fifth amendment rights." If that is the case will the Supreme Court be able to make that ruling. If not then out countries national defense is at stake. So either way we run into some sort of problem. However the solution is simple. If our goal in this country is to protect the citizens then the Supreme Court should rule in favor of removing reporters' rights to with-hold their sources. However if it is the case that our governments primary goal and function is to protect citizens' civil, and natural rights (as I believe), then the Supreme Court must rule against and provide measures  to protect future reporters from this situation. One simple way to make this happen is to allow reporters to have a version of the attorney-client privilege. This would allow people to have their first amendment protected and allow the reporters from being held accountable. This would guarantee all party's' rights would not be violated.


http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2013/10/supreme-court-to-get-reporters-privilege-plea-175715.html?hp=l13

White House works to flip Obamacare narrative

The article White House works to flip Obamacare narrative is another one of the many articles that have come out over the last few weeks discussing "Obamacare" and the problems it is causing between the two major parties in government.

This article specifically discusses the "glitchy health care enrollment site" and how the Republicans are arguing that the major problems with it are because the Democrats were "slow to release relevant data" to several of the contractors.  The Republicans are also complaining about the secrecy of many aspects of "Obamacare" so to counter this secrecy the Republicans are calling for "weekly reports on the exchanges".  The last complaint many Republicans are bringing up is about the White House telling "contractors one month before HealthCare.gov went up to make consumers register before they see prices", doing so is causing poor customer experience because consumers don't like the "idea of getting through the clunky registration process before seeing prices".

All of these problems that are being brought up are causing Congressional Hearings to be held with the first of them being held Thursday by The House Energy and Commerce Committee.  This hearing is shaping up to be a full on assault on the Obama Administration by the tech companies since they have already come out to the Oversight committee discussing the delayed release of important information and data such as The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services not handing over the final technical requirements until May which immensely slowed down the process and in some cases a third of the required work had to be redone which is not only unfair to the contractors but also makes it apear as if The Democrats and The Obama Administration are as Florida Senator Marco Rubio said "withholding information so that people won’t see the “ugly things” of the law".

Glitches with Obamacare

It’s no secret that there are glitches to Obamacare. According to a recent Washington Post article, “it crashed after a simulation in which just a few hundred people tried to log on simultaneously.” Forbes magazine claims that the healthcare.gov website forces people to create an account and enter their personal information before they can shop and select plans. This creates a “traffic bottleneck” which causes a lag as the government checks the information provided and if the person qualifies for subsidies. Forbes says, “HHS bureaucrats knew this would make the website run more slowly. But they were more afraid that letting people see the underlying cost of Obamacare’s insurance plans would scare people away.” These glitches are starting to frustrate people. If they have to join, then they should have smoothed out all the defects before they opened it. These glitches are not the only thing that are making American upset, on average Americans will have to pay more than their current health plan. For instance, Ohio is expecting their insurance premiums to jump up to almost 41%. The whole point of the affordable health care act is to make insurance more affordable, not make it more expensive. Perhaps Obamacare really isn’t an affordable health care act after all.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/2013/10/21/161a3500-3a85-11e3-b6a9-da62c264f40e_story.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/10/14/obamacares-website-is-crashing-because-it-doesnt-want-you-to-know-health-plans-true-costs/

Health Care Hotline

The new health care bill is now in effect and has been for the past few weeks. From the first day, it had begun to experience problems with its website, healthcare.gov. People had been waiting for days and still had not been able to log on. Glitches in the website prompted the government to open up a new Health Care Hotline. The hotline is supposed to provide people with an alternative to the website. The president said that the hotline will only take twenty five for someone to sign up. Sean Hannity from Fox News had called into the hotline four times and had no success. The woman on the hotline told him to try logging into the website in forty two hours. The new hotline that can sign somebody up in 25 minutes only tells people to try the website again which still has not been fixed. There needs to be a new solution for the failing website and hotline.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2762135292001/what-happened-when-hannity-called-the-obamacare-hotline/?playlist_id=928378949001

Jobs numbers bring politics as usual

The public is mad over the 16-day government shutdown, this could be a big reality check for Washington politicians as polls show a outrage with the politicians inability to get the things they want done. The latest unemployment number came out Tuesday and has brought back the sense of politics. Even though 148,000 jobs were added in the moth of September. Partisans are using job numbers to help keep their political position. It seems like the number of people are angered all around after the shut down. Democrats say "that the economy has a long way to go", as the unemployment rate is 7.2 percent and that more than 11 million people remain unemployed. . I believe that we need to get more jobs and cant get this with Obamacare. Obamacare is going to do the opposite, the corporations will see that it is easier to higher people as part time workers then full time. We cant rely on the politicians because their not getting it done. I also believe that republicans have shot themselves in the foot with this.




http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/22/politics/jobs-numbers-politics/index.html?hpt=po_t1