Group items tagged

What if the current massive spying on Americans began with an innocent secret executive order signed by President Reagan in 1986? What if Reagan contemplated that he was only authorizing American spies to spy on foreign spies unlawfully present in the U.S.? What if Reagan knew and respected the history of the Fourth Amendment?

Interesting opinion. This article makes me reflect on that balance between our government keeping us safe and invading our privacy. Strange in a way to think that Americans have been having this battle with our own government since the Revolutionary War!

Congressional Republicans are vowing to fight President Barack Obama's plan to make immigration changes through executive action, but they are struggling with how to do that without triggering another government shutdown. The House and Senate need to pass a measure during the lame duck session to fund federal agencies, which will run out of money in mid-December.

^

This is an interesting follow up article: 5 Myths of Illegal Immigration. http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/economy/immigration-myths/index.html Some of the fact presented are surprising.

I remember when we discussed Shays rebellion in class... that was in 1786. Is it 2016 already? I am really curious what you think of this situation.

I think that preserving wildlife is important, but not at the expense of the ranchers and farmers who were forced to sell their land. It doesn't matter how much money they were paid; now that they lost their source of income, once the money's gone, it's gone. And they'd have to get a new job in an occupation that requires a vastly different skill set. I'd be upset if my land was forced away from me so the government could undo all my hard work and make it into a wildlife preserve.

While I find that the wild life is important, it was originally the farmer's land and they have the right to not sell their land. I could see where the government could find that the farmers were burning the land because they were angry, however, them burning it for poaching is a little far. It was both a son and father and they were marking where their property ended and the reserve started, this is very logical and I don't really understand where the government couldn't see that it got a little out of control. Fires can be unpredictable and are usually hard to control.

What are your thoughts on the gun control debate. It will be 1 month tomorrow that Parkland FL school shooter killed 17 and seriously wounded 17 others. Has the outrage become "yesterdays news"? How do the POLITICS of this issue make solutions difficult to reach?

I feel maybe they should be more strict on guns and the background checks be more thorough. just wondering why 21 for semiauto pistols but 18 for fully auto AR's. It should be the other way around.

its yesterday news because after the shooting we been talking about to raise the age in assault rifle as in the last couple of weeks so this shooting gave a heads up about school safety and the age to buy assault rifles.

"Facebook admits: governments exploited us to spread propaganda"

"House leaders told GOP lawmakers Saturday that they plan to devote their energy in the coming week to keeping the federal government open, conspicuously avoiding an immediate commitment to take up health care despite pledges to do so by conservatives and the White House."

"The demand for border funding, as well as a push for a vote on health care, has become a surprise to Democrats, who have been working for more than a month to create a spending bill that would keep the government open through the end of the year on September 30."

"The Democratic-controlled Senate Saturday overcame Republican roadblocks and a debate that lasted beyond 24 hours to pass President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package which would provide millions of Americans with $1,400 direct payments, billions of dollars for vaccine distribution, and funds to help reopen schools and colleges."

I think this is good because it gives people who lost money during covid a chance to buy some extra things for themselves or their families.

I think the stimulus check was good for a lot of people that really did need it since they didn't have a job due to covid.

I think it is good that Giffords is pushing for gun control because I believe that we need it.

I agree with you, Grayson. The government should make people own a gun safe to store all of their weapons. It is dangerous for guns to be located somewhere where anyone can get their hands on them. Despite that fact, the second amendment gives you the right to own weapons. Although there have been many gun crimes in the United States, lately, you cannot take away that right. Just because some people handle weapons irresponsibly, all people should not be punished for it.

i do like my guns and i dont want the government telling me i cant have them. taking guns away wont stop murders it will just make them happen in a different way

Someone posted this, but it wasn't possible to comment

First point: I fail to see how denying a single cell the chance to go through mitosis is abortion. It's no more aware than bacteria. Also, the author is referencing the morning-after pill. For some reason there's a lot of confusion about how the morning after pill actually works. It prevents the egg from joining the sperm, or depending on where the woman is in her cycle, prevents the ovaries from releasing eggs. Contrary to what pro-life proponents apparently believe, conception does not happen immediately after having sex. If using the morning-after pill is abortion, we may as well call abstinence abortion. Secondly, "the mandate requires private citizens who are also employers to purchase private goods (health insurance services) with private money from non-government companies." This is clearly written by a sensationalist. What it really means is that a company has to use its own money to provide healthcare. (And everyone seems to be forgetting that employees don't just receive healthcare plans for free). There is a difference between being a private citizen and being an employer. Owning a public company and employing people is about as far from private as you can get. "Requiring private citizens to pay for abortifacients is more akin to requiring the Amish to use their own money to purchase weapons from a private gun dealer or be forced into bankruptcy. Or kind of like forcing anti-pornography legal scholar Catharine MacKinnon to buy pornography for her law students." This is simply ludicrous and shows that the author clearly doesn't understand what a business is. It's a corporation, it employees people, it isn't a private citizen. I will admit that if Hobby Lobby employed only people who were in complete agreement with the beliefs of the owners I would support them in their case. However, the reality is that many of Hobby Lobby's employees don't share the exact same beliefs as the owner. And it would in fact be illegal for Hobby Lobby to choose their employ

ees because of their beliefs. And the last time I checked, in America we don't make people follow certain religions or beliefs. In fact, the law isn't supposed to be based in religion. I know it sounds shocking, but it actually isn't okay to force a religion on people, or to make everyone live in accordance with one belief system, which is exactly what Hobby Lobby, and everyone who argues against this provision in the new health care law, is trying to do. Lastly, the author says repeatedly that this law essentially discriminates against Christians, which is a complete lie. Christians is a broad term. There are Christians who believe in all kinds of birth control and then there are those who think all birth control should be outlawed. There are even Christians who get abortions. So, and this is a message to anyone who writes articles of this kind, stop saying just saying Christians. Tell the truth and call yourself a Fundamentalist. Saying Christians make it seem like the majority of people who believe in Jesus Christ agree with you, and they don't. You're a minority, and you need to accept that. And maybe read a little about how our government works. It's a majority rules system.

"Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte is known for his outspoken comments and controversial governing style."

It was a very unprofessional thing to say, especially about a fellow leader. Even if you disagree with someone that was taken out of hand.

That Philippines President Duterte needs to loosen up, he has bad thoughts about everyone, and says them out loud, whether they're a common citizen or a leader, and he's proving himself to be dangerous to others. He said, "You drug pushers, hold-up men and do-nothings, you better go out. Because I'd kill you." He also raped a woman of her dignity after she was dead saying, "What a pity...they raped her, they all lined up. I was mad she was raped, but she was so beautiful. I thought, the mayor should have been first." He called both President Obama and the Pope something inappropriate.

"The top holder by far is U.S. citizens and American entities, such as state and local governments, pension funds, mutual funds, and the Federal Reserve. Together they own the vast majority -- 67.5% -- of the debt. Foreign nations only hold 32.5% of the total."

Best case scenario is trump alleviates a small fraction of our debt but destroys our foreign relations along the way. I wouldn't want someone who has had 4 companies go bankrupt gambling with the entire united states economy anyway.

The best way this could go is he suttels some of the debt but runs our reputation in the process and nobody will buy bonds anymore so it would become worse in the long run

This would for sure help our debt if they did end up legalizing it and taxing it!

I am actually surprised that the govt hasn't legalized it yet because the govt loves money and marijuana sales makes on average 1.5 billion dollars a year so in about 10 years (maybe) the USA could actually not be in debt.

i dont see why marijuana is not legal anymore its actually funny how our first president grew marijuana as a cash crop

no, this is wrong. the government should not be spending so much time tracking us. its fascist. The more we give our liberties away to the government, the more they are going to try and take. with how much peoples personal lives are wrapped up in electronics, it is imperative that we retain our rights. its just a invasion of privacy. either way, with the economy issue i think the last thing we should be wasting money on is recording where the johnson family went for vacation.

This is unethical. I don't want a "1984" by George Orwell to happen

"Here's a quick Q&A to get you caught up on what happened on Monday and what to expect going forward."

The way the U.S. is taking this really shows how much we rely on our government, and how much people take for granted in our every day lives. I'm surprised that there haven't been any major riots because of all the effects this could have if this shutdown continues.

Hopefully something will go through on limiting government surveillance. Because stuff like this disturbs me... We'll see though...

Washington (CNN) -- This Congress is going out just the way it began: in complete disarray. Fourteen months after tea party conservatives ignored Republican leaders and forced a two-week government shutdown, another one came close to happening -- this time because liberals were blowing off President Barack Obama's pleas to support a government funding measure.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry hails the new administration as a "major milestone" Iraq's parliament has approved a new government, setting the stage for expanded U.S. military support to battle the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS).

I think its good that John Kerry is planing to stop a terrorist group.

WASHINGTON -- For the second consecutive year, the Obama administration more often than ever censored government files or outright denied access to them under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, according to a new analysis of federal data by The Associated Press.