C.I.A. Judgment on Russia Built on Swell of Evidence (late)

C.I.A. Judgment on Russia Built on Swell of Evidence (late)

American spy and law enforcement agencies were united in the belief, in the weeks before the presidential election, that the Russian government had deployed computer hackers to sow chaos during the campaign. The C.I.A.’s conclusion does not seem to be the result of specific new intelligence obtained. But instead, it was an analysis of what many believe to be overwhelming evidence. Evidence that others feel does not support firm judgments. “I think it’s ridiculous. I think it’s just another excuse. I don’t believe it,” Mr. Trump said on Sunday in an interview on Fox News. And yet Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, went public and accused the Russians of election interference. American intelligence officials also believed that Russia had access to the databases housing Republican National Committee data. More generally, the Russian government has blamed Mrs. Clinton, along with the C.I.A. and other American officials, for encouraging anti-Russian revolts during the 2003 Rose Revolution in Georgia and the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine. A senior American law enforcement official said the F.B.I. believed that the Russians probably had a combination of goals. Such as damaging Mrs. Clinton during the election and undermining American democratic institutions. But the agency’s suspicions about a direct effort by Russia to help Mr. Trump.Or about possible connections between the two camps, appear to have waned as the investigation continued into September and October. Now that a partisan squall has erupted over exactly what role Russia played in influencing the election, there is growing momentum among both Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill to have a congressional investigation.

The Dangers of Echo Chambers on Campus

After Donald Trump’s election, some universities, faculty members canceled classes for weeping, terrified students who asked: How could this possibly be happening? It is when students inhabit liberal bubbles, they’re not learning much about their own country. To be fully educated, students should encounter not only Plato, but also Republicans. Liberal outrage at Trump’s presidency will increase the problem of liberal echo chambers, by creating a more hostile environment for conservatives and evangelicals. At Oberlin College soon after the election, students erupted in protests after a local bakery was accused of racial profiling of a black student in a shoplifting case. The student senate endorsed a boycott of the bakery, and demonstrators carried signs calling the owner a racist. This is because of the bubble that students are taking way to seriously. The weakest argument against intellectual diversity is that conservatives or evangelicals have nothing to add to the conversation. The weakest argument against intellectual diversity is that conservatives or evangelicals have nothing to add to the conversation. Of course, we shouldn’t empower racists and misogynists on campuses.  underscores that we were out of touch with much of America, and we will fight back more effectively if we are less isolated. When universities are echo chambers, they become conservative punch lines, and liberal hand-wringing 

Gun Control (late)

Should guns be banned? Or not? Some say yes and some say yes, and some say no. It depends on the person and the reasons they come up with. It was on October 30th, that a group of three armed people attempted to rob a Pizza Hut in Charlotte, North Carolina. Sadly one of them was shot and killed by an employee during the process. The guy who was shot was Michael Grace Jr.. The question then comes back to, should guns be banned? Or not? Yes if there were no guns then Michael would not have been shot and killed. But you also have to think about all the other items the employee had a choice of using. If guns should be banned then so should all other things that could be used to kill or seriously harm other people. If we are going to out law guns then we should do the same to knives, shovels, rakes, bats, forks even. The list could go on and on. Also we should not ban guns, we should just ban certain people from buying guns. The people are doing more harm than the guns in some ways. Or another way to keep it under control is to just ban certain guns. There are guns like a fully automatics that we really don’t need to sell in public stores. 

Public Policy

Public policy is created from a wide range of different people. Actors, interests of different people, institutions, and a variety of processes for policies. Our students should know that the bureaucracy and the courts are all stages in the policy process. Also, students should investigate on policy and issue networks of the domestic and foreign policy areas. 

It is when the government decides to resolve a social problem that a public policy is made. There are five steps that are taken to make a public policy: 1) defining the role of government; 2) agenda setting; 3) policy formulation; 4) policy implementation; and 5) policy evaluation. In American history, the most important area in public policy has been economic policy. Our policy makers have always been debating on which idea they should support, laissez-faire free market principles or redistributionist interventionist policies. Laissez-faire free market principles are believing that the government should intervene as little as possible in the direction of economic affairs. Also, the United States has joined international trading organisations like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). We had done that in order to raise our business with the rest of the world. It was before FDR that our federal government did not want to be a part of domestic policy making. But since we have gotten involved in domestic policies we have seen a rise in programs like Social Security and Welfare. 

American Creation (late)

In the book American Creation, the author, Joseph J. Ellis, he talks about how the majority would lose to the minority. Also that a new plan of government that has never been tried before would become so successful. It was in the year of 1783 when the War for Independence was ended that George Washington would have written his last Circular to the States. Washington saw it as the American Revolution. It was the continued battle for the eastern third of North America. Two signed treaties would ensure that the newly founded Unties states of America would stay just that uncontested. The Peace of Paris in 1763 had eliminated France and the Treaty of Paris in 1783 had eliminated Great Britain. Afterwards, Washington had proposed an American tour of the “New Empire.” That proposal was a breathtaking imperial vision that would late become to be known as “manifest destiny.” Washington later wrote, “We have indeed so plain a road before us that it must be worse than ignorance if we miss it.”  

Electoral College not about Democracy, but about Power

Electoral College not about Democracy, but about Power

Hillary Clinton blames the FBI for her losing the election. She thinks it’s because the FBI reopened the investigation into her emails. Also everyone was stunned by Trump’s big win in the election. Nobody thought that he was going to win. Now all the sore losers of the 2016 election are getting angry at the Constitution. these liberal officials have a point. The Electoral College is not democratic, if by democratic they mean rule by simple majority. But the Electoral College’s exaggeration of the power of the states is not some bizarre mistake or a constitutional version of the appendix. The very existence of the Senate, where the Constitution allocates two Senators to each state, runs directly counter to the idea of popular representation. And yet the Constitution requires the agreement of the Senate, where the majority of the people have no voice, to most of our most important decisions. In most of our democratic allies, such as Great Britain, Germany, and Japan, the majority party in the legislature selects a prime minister, who becomes head of the executive branch as well. 

Many people have been asking is Donald Trump going to be a good president. Trump is a business man and he is going to run this country financially. He does know what he’s doing in that area. As for the political ways, Trump is going to have trouble. A man that says he is going to build a wall dividing Mexico and America, is a crazy man. If he is that crazy, then you can bet that he will not think about it twice if it comes to pressing the red button. Trump believes that he would be able to create twenty-five million jobs for this country. And when he says this he wants to cut all the taxes on the rich and raise them for everyone else. How much further is he willing to go? What other outrageous ideas, or laws, or anything else you can think of will Trump come up with.

America's Election or the Worlds?

Even though to some it may seem like the presidential elections would only affect Americans, it in facts plays a huge part on how the world gets along. Within the past century, our American land has been hit with the horrible Pearl Harbor and then 9/11. And the only thing that ended up changing was the world order. The article American’s election or the Worlds? by Simon Kuper says: “Even if the Red Army had rolled across western Europe, life in Alabama or Ohio would have been almost undisturbed.” This is saying that when Donald Trump had launched his campaign he had to come up with some sort of made up foreign creature. Which was the Mexican rapist. Our president has the power to do one if three things. One, to help and protect the rest of the world. Two, to mess up everything. Three, just simply ignore and not care at all about the world.

For the past eight years, Barack Obama was trying to get rid of the global policeman’s baton. If Trump wins the election there is a very, very high chance that we could be isolated from the rest of the world. One other thing that is scary for foreign countries besides America being isolated from the world is American irresponsibility. In one poll for Donald, the Lincoln Leadership Initiative, 22% of his supporters believed that Donald would start a nuclear war.

Is Freedom of Speech a Weapon?

Is Freedom of Speech a Weapon?

Life at American colleges these days are viewed as campus hotbeds of narrow-mindedness for freedom of speech. However, there is a new report that questions that as well as warning of a different risk. The report by PEN America states: “a growing perception among young people that cries ‘free speech’ are too often used as a cudgel against them.” This report that is titled “And Campus for all: Diversity, Inclusion and Freedom of Speech at U.S. Universities” will go over a bunch of triggering topics. These topics are trigger warnings; microaggressions; safe places; and controversial campus speakers. This report also includes a very apparent difference of viewpoints between advocates and activists for free speech. This is because of a conversation that would dismiss a students’ demand for fairness and inclusion. 

This report warns us of the possibility that a new generation will rise and turn against free speech. Suzanne Nossel, the group’s executive director, says otherwise. She says that the report will end up promoting more diverse voices through different projects such as PEN’s annual World Voices Festival of International Literature. There was a poll that was taken last spring that showed most college students were in favor of free speech on campus in general. The only thing was that college students also favored some restrictions on “intentionally offensive” speech. “From an old-fashioned free-speech perspective, it strikes one as contradictory,” said Alberto Ibargüen, the chief executive of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, a sponsor of the poll. This PEN report also ends up running its self into some contradictions. It looks at cases for and against requests of safe spaces, and the report looks at campaigns against so-called microaggressions. 

“It’s a very smart and thoughtful and avoids caricature. They are fully committed to robust, uninhibited speech. But they also recognize words matter,” said Jerry Kang. Jerry Kang is the vice chancellor for equity, diversity, and inclusion at the University of California, Los Angeles, and a legal scholar who has studied implicit bias and was interviewed for the report. He said that he appreciated PEN’s efforts to understand the college students’ point of view. 

Presidential Debate

On the subject of money and making this economy better, Hillary Clinton thinks that it’s a good idea to create new jobs with rising incomes as well as raising the minimum wage for jobs. Hillary believes that creating an economy with debt free colleges and a tax system that would reward workers is the best way to go. She would also like to raise the taxes on the rich. Hillary says that with the here plan she would be able to create 10 million more jobs. And then continues on to say that Donald Trump will lose 3.5 million jobs in this country. On the other hand, Donald Trump says that he Would create 25 million jobs in this country. He says that Hillary doesn’t even have a plan on how to create more jobs and keep everyone happy. One thing that Hillary was happy about, was the installation of solar panels. She believes that it was one of the best investments that this country has made. Trump thinks that solar panels were the worst idea for the country. As for taxes, Trump wants to cut the taxes on the rich.

With all the criminal activities that have been happening both the candidates believe that stability should be restored between all the communities and the police force. To add on to that subject, Hillary also believes that there should be a better training for the police. Donald Trump says that he wants to restore law and order in this society. He wants to get rid of gangs, that he says are made of all illegal immigrants. Also during this debate, Trump was asked multiple times about what he thought about the police convicting someone based on racial profiling. If he thought, it was true or false. And continually he avoided a direct yes or no answer. The fact that he avoided it says that he was basically agreeing with the police.

Moving on to the subject of all the cyber-attacks and how to make America safer, Hillary had said that the things we should focus on are that Russia is the one that has been behind all the cyber-attacks. She also believes that we should just wipe out ISIS. No matter the costs. No matter the means. Hillary also made the statement that Donald Trump doesn’t care if any other countries have nuclear weapons. That he thinks its ok for them to have them.

What Religion Would Jesus Belong To?

What Religion Would Jesus Belong To?

The way people view religions today are completely different from what it used to be. The change has affected a lot of the major religions, such as Muslims, Buddhists, and the Christian faith. 

Most of the Christians changed and some stayed with the old ways. “Our religions often stand for the very opposite of what their founders stood for,” notes Brian D. McLaren, a former preacher. “No wonder more and more of us who are Christians by birth, by choice, or both find ourselves shaking our heads and asking, ‘What happened to Christianity?’” Most of the ideologies of Christianity have been reformed to fit what the people want. Even those that say they are a Christian are mainly following a lie. Atheists, as well as those who feel spiritual but don't identify with a religion, are starting to be known as apart of a secular group called the "nones". 

As of right now only one-half of the American Christians would be able to name at least four Gospels. About 41 percent would be able to tell you about Job. With all this, it is best belied to worry less about doctrines and worry more about actions. One big question that McLaren asks is: “Could Christians migrate from defining their faith as a system of beliefs to expressing it as a loving way of life?” The answer? Yes, a migration like this could take place, because religion can and does migrate. It would lead everyone away religious bureaucracy and back towards the original ways of the religion. 

Transgender Restroom Laws

One Friday Raleigh, N.C. a federal judge ruled that students and employees must be allowed to use restrooms matching their gender identity at the University of North Carolina. Then a U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder had temporarily blocked three plaintiffs that were called HB2 until it goes to trial. Schroeder’s final decision would be made after the trial.

                HB2 was then passed in march and it said that transgender people had to use the restroom that has to correspond to whatever sex is on their birth certificates. This would also exclude any antidiscrimination protections. North Carolina’s Republican leaders said that the law was passed because it would protect privacy and safety. They also said that it would be able to keep any guys out of the woman’s restrooms and prevent any hard that could come out of it All the transgender residents claimed that the restroom safety is protected by laws already and that the HB2 law is harmful and discriminatory.

                Later on, Schroeder said that the three plaintiffs are likely to succeed in their arguments that HB2 violates Title IX. Then again Schroeder says that the transgender residents have not shown that they are likely to win the argument that the HB2 goes against their constitutional equal rights protection. 

LGBT

One of the major conflicts of the LGBT is that you are either for or against the idea and that you cannot possibly be neutral. All those in the middle ground of the subject cannot avoid the subject. The question will always come back and then those that said that they were neutral would then finally face the fact and choose a side. There is also the matter of should all individuals classified under LGBT be treated equally. For the most part most of those that say LGBT is a bad thing are those that are following their beliefs from a religious view. The question there is, is that ok for all religious people shun the LGBT. Should there be a law that bans that kind of behaviour? 

Of course, politics have a major part on the view of the LGBT. In 2015 the Supreme Court's decision to allow gay marriage in all 50 states was an important decision. Also the fact that schools and other places have been disregarding all discrimination on the LGBT. In schools, there have been many cases of boys or girls saying that they are more comfortable being classified as their opposite sex. Therefore all gender and sexual discriminations are starting to be rejected by society. Even Donald Trump at one point was defending the LGBT and saying that it is ok to be like that. In a political view is Trump the best candidate to be president just because he is ok with people under the LGBT? If Hillary is elected, would she somehow influence the Supreme Court into passing a law saying that all those wanting to be classified as LGBT are not allowed to exist?

Once everyone, even all those hating or saying LGBT is ok under religious standpoints, has agreed to no discrimination against the LGBT, what changes are there to be done? The society today is what is keeping changes from happening. There is the matter of "if someone famous does something then we should all do the same thing", or, "is they don't like something or a certain group of people then so should we". How far will this society take and twist the standers of everything and everyone? 

Why Abortion is Wrong

When a woman is having an abortion her thoughts wouldn’t be “oh this is a bad idea”, she’s not even thinking what she is doing is very bad. People say that the baby isn’t even born or fully developed so getting an abortion is “ok” to do. When in fact it is a very bad thing. Even if the baby isn’t fully developed it still has a heartbeat therefore it is alive. Yes, some abortions are because the women are getting raped, but that still doesn’t excuse the procedure. Yes, the woman was raped. Yes, she got pregnant when she didn’t want to, but if rape is an excuse for an abortion, how many other excuse, how far will they take the excuses just so they can get an abortion. It is from the moment that baby is conceived in the womb that it is alive. The size or the weight of the baby doesn’t even matter. The thing that matters is the fact that there is a baby alive and growing, and that there is an essence of that baby. The thing that most women don’t realize as well is that there is a risk to having an abortion. Some researchers have teamed together and found out that in some cases the mother not only sentenced the baby to death but herself as well. Some studies have shown that after an abortion in some clinics there is a risk for the mother to get cancer. Next time a woman is thinking about getting an abortion they should really consider all the things that could happen to her as well as what she is doing to an innocent life.