In 1945, Soviet troops began to occupy Korea, but withdrew three years later, when they founded the "Democratic" Peoples "Republic" of Korea was founded. Shortly thereafter, the south broke off from the north, prompting a military response from the north. The war is then ended by an armistice agreement in 1953. Over the 60's, the nation began to industrialize. In 1981 both North and South Korea agree to join the United Nations, which, in the eyes of the general people marked a noticeable turning point in the nation's path.
In 1992, the North Korean government allows members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to enter their borders, but refused them access to sites where it was rumored North Korea was testing atomic weaponry. In 1994, Kim Il Sung, leader of North Korea, passed on, but in 1998, he was named as "Eternal President," despite already being dead; at this time, his son's (Kim Jong Il) power is extended to also make him head of state. In December of 2011, Kim Jong Il died, leaving the throne open to his son, Kim Jong Un, who has taken power, and ruled ever since.
Currently, Kim Jong Un is the leader of the "Glorious Democratic People's Republic of Korea," and he is beloved by his people, despite his youth. There have been floods, and famine in North Korea since 2011, but the supplies we granted them do not seem to be doing much good at the current time, based on the fact that they asked for more supplies in August of 2012.
Due to the almost cult-like devotion of the people of Korea, I. Do not believe that any kind of regime change will be possible for a long time. And even then, the change will simply be of dictator, and it will, in theory be a long time until there is a change in governmental system. A change in regime is even less likely than a camel passing through the eye of a needle.
Monday, February 3, 2014
Monday, January 13, 2014
Essay 10
The fundamental goal of interest groups are to attempt to get
legislation passed, which is in favor of one of the desires of an
interest group. Such as, the NRA will do everything in their power to
ensure looser gun regulations, and ensuring that anybody who desires one
has an opportunity to receive a firearm; and the Susan B. Anthony List
attempts to end abortion.
The goals of the major parties generally stand in stark opposition to one another, with both sides attempting to make their "ideal" governmental system. The Republicans, generally considered to be conservative, wish to end abortion, allow for greater freedom of weaponry, desire smaller national government, and more power, and rights to the individual, while still supporting "big business." The Democrats on the other hand, generally liberal, stand for pro-choice, equal rights, and more power to the federal government.
There are a number of ways in which interest groups help to support their party of choice. One of these methods is donating money to a particular candidate, or their party, in attempts to get this individual elected into an office of power. Another way interest groups support parties is in attempting to endear this party to the American public.
When interest groups give money to a particular candidate, they have multiple ways in which to do this. There is directly donating to their campaign, which will allow for ads that directly say "vote for me," and puts someone who shares their view into power. The other way is through the usage of Issue ads, which are advertisements that do not directly endorse a particular candidate, but instead attempt to convince the people watching to vote based on a particular issue, such as guns, abortion, or taxes.
The goals of the major parties generally stand in stark opposition to one another, with both sides attempting to make their "ideal" governmental system. The Republicans, generally considered to be conservative, wish to end abortion, allow for greater freedom of weaponry, desire smaller national government, and more power, and rights to the individual, while still supporting "big business." The Democrats on the other hand, generally liberal, stand for pro-choice, equal rights, and more power to the federal government.
There are a number of ways in which interest groups help to support their party of choice. One of these methods is donating money to a particular candidate, or their party, in attempts to get this individual elected into an office of power. Another way interest groups support parties is in attempting to endear this party to the American public.
When interest groups give money to a particular candidate, they have multiple ways in which to do this. There is directly donating to their campaign, which will allow for ads that directly say "vote for me," and puts someone who shares their view into power. The other way is through the usage of Issue ads, which are advertisements that do not directly endorse a particular candidate, but instead attempt to convince the people watching to vote based on a particular issue, such as guns, abortion, or taxes.
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Economic reform essay
There have been a number of economic reform discussed by the House of Representatives, and the Senate over the past several years. These reforms work in both directions, decreasing donations in politics, and increasing the amount that can be donated. The elimination of soft money, and the raising of limits on individual campaign contributions have both been discussed.
Soft money, AKA the endless anonymous donations to a campaign, or candidate, often through the proxy of a Special Interest Group. Some of the possible reasons in favor of eliminating soft money are general arguments against corruption in the government, and more specific complaints against big business holding the government by the metaphorical throat. Some arguments cast in favor of keeping the usage of soft money are that removing it would violate free speech, and that it would take away the right of the people to spend their money as they wish. In essence, it would be difficult to eliminate soft money, due to those defending it, but there are still those attempting to abolish the practice.
Raising the limits on individual campaign spending would allow for those in power to be granted more funding by others in power, who desire their views to be heard/ seen in a political environment. A reason to support the increase in donations, is that humans, especially American's, have the right to say, and do what they want, and campaign contributions allow for you to express your opinion by assisting someone with the same ideals to be put into political power. A good reason to stand against the increase in individual campaign contributions is that by increasing the amount of money that could be donated, they would increase the amount of power lying in the hands of the wealthy, even those whose views and opinions are purely self beneficial.
Citizens United had a case, which reached the Supreme Court; the trial decided that it was against first constitution rights to restrict the amount of money that can be donated by individual spending.
Soft money, AKA the endless anonymous donations to a campaign, or candidate, often through the proxy of a Special Interest Group. Some of the possible reasons in favor of eliminating soft money are general arguments against corruption in the government, and more specific complaints against big business holding the government by the metaphorical throat. Some arguments cast in favor of keeping the usage of soft money are that removing it would violate free speech, and that it would take away the right of the people to spend their money as they wish. In essence, it would be difficult to eliminate soft money, due to those defending it, but there are still those attempting to abolish the practice.
Raising the limits on individual campaign spending would allow for those in power to be granted more funding by others in power, who desire their views to be heard/ seen in a political environment. A reason to support the increase in donations, is that humans, especially American's, have the right to say, and do what they want, and campaign contributions allow for you to express your opinion by assisting someone with the same ideals to be put into political power. A good reason to stand against the increase in individual campaign contributions is that by increasing the amount of money that could be donated, they would increase the amount of power lying in the hands of the wealthy, even those whose views and opinions are purely self beneficial.
Citizens United had a case, which reached the Supreme Court; the trial decided that it was against first constitution rights to restrict the amount of money that can be donated by individual spending.
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
Interest Groups
Part A:
Litigation: The process of taking legal action. Litigation could help an interest group by creating controversy about a certain candidate, and causing people to doubt him, and vote for the other candidate. Also, it can be used to fight laws that a group considers to be unjust.
Campaign contributions: By donating money to a candidate, or, more importantly, their campaign, they give a candidate the funding required to create positive publicity in favor of their candidate of choice.
Grassroots lobbying: The process of attempting to indirectly influence legislature not through the Senator or Congressman, but through their constituents. It also covers more traditional lobbying tactics of attempting to sway political votes.
Part B:
American Medical Association: Litigation. It fights against laws it believes are unjust in court.
Sierra Club: Grassroots lobbying. The Sierra club is one of the oldest interest groups in the history of the United States, and it specializes in grassroots lobbying.
NRA: Specializing in Lobbying, the NRA is one of the largest, and most powerful lobbying groups in the county, it is also one of the oldest. It's membership is over 5,000,000.
NAACP: Litigation: The NAACP repeatedly went to court to defend civil rights issues. Especially for African Americans.
Litigation: The process of taking legal action. Litigation could help an interest group by creating controversy about a certain candidate, and causing people to doubt him, and vote for the other candidate. Also, it can be used to fight laws that a group considers to be unjust.
Campaign contributions: By donating money to a candidate, or, more importantly, their campaign, they give a candidate the funding required to create positive publicity in favor of their candidate of choice.
Grassroots lobbying: The process of attempting to indirectly influence legislature not through the Senator or Congressman, but through their constituents. It also covers more traditional lobbying tactics of attempting to sway political votes.
Part B:
American Medical Association: Litigation. It fights against laws it believes are unjust in court.
Sierra Club: Grassroots lobbying. The Sierra club is one of the oldest interest groups in the history of the United States, and it specializes in grassroots lobbying.
NRA: Specializing in Lobbying, the NRA is one of the largest, and most powerful lobbying groups in the county, it is also one of the oldest. It's membership is over 5,000,000.
NAACP: Litigation: The NAACP repeatedly went to court to defend civil rights issues. Especially for African Americans.
Essay #6
Part A:
Age: Older people vote more. A lifetime of political information. Very strong opinions come with age. Votes could potentially effect the elderly more than the rest of the general population (medicare, welfare, veteran benefits (in some cases))
Education: More education means more likelihood of voting. Better understands issues posed to them.
Part B:
Those under 18 years of age are not allowed to vote for the president, and this decreases voter turnout because the young have strong opinions, and would vote for the president of their choice, if they had the option.
Part C:
Political parties. Without the need to actually vote for your candidate, you can still "participate" in the political process by belonging to a political party. There is no commitment to belong to a party, one simply needs to claim loyalty to that party, whether or not they actually do anything about it.
Age: Older people vote more. A lifetime of political information. Very strong opinions come with age. Votes could potentially effect the elderly more than the rest of the general population (medicare, welfare, veteran benefits (in some cases))
Education: More education means more likelihood of voting. Better understands issues posed to them.
Part B:
Those under 18 years of age are not allowed to vote for the president, and this decreases voter turnout because the young have strong opinions, and would vote for the president of their choice, if they had the option.
Part C:
Political parties. Without the need to actually vote for your candidate, you can still "participate" in the political process by belonging to a political party. There is no commitment to belong to a party, one simply needs to claim loyalty to that party, whether or not they actually do anything about it.
Monday, December 2, 2013
Senator Wyden
Biography:
Born in Wichita Kansas, on May 3rd of 1949, Senator Ron Wyden attended school in Palo Alto California. He attended college at Stanford, and studied law at the University Of Oregon Law School in Eugene Oregon. He provided legal services to senior citizens from 1977-1979. He was elected as a democratic representative to Congress, and served from 1981-1996.
In 1996 he resigned from Congress, upon being elected to the Senate. He has served on the Senate ever since. Ron Wyden is devoted to making his constituents heard in the Senate. Wyden regularly holds "open to all" town meetings, so that he can hear what his citizens want from him, and from their government. He attempts to reach across the aisle, and reach bipartisan solutions.
Committees:
Senator Ron Wyden supports Abortion, and Stem Cell research. He has also voted in ways that "support" pro-choice, such as allowing minors to cross state lines to receive abortions. He also voted to protect the secrecy of minors who got abortions out of state, by not making it a necessity to contact the parents of aforementioned children. But he did not desire for all teenage girls to become mothers at 16, so he voted to spend $100,000,000 on preventing teen pregnancy by properly educating teenagers, and providing contraceptives.
Wyden's opinions on education is a very liberal standpoint. He has attempted to ensure that all potential college students know the circumstances they shall find in the working world after college. He hopes that this will allow students to make more educate decisions on which college they should attend, what their major should be, and what career path they should follow if they wish to succeed in life. Wyden also authored the College Tuitions Savings Act, which eventually became law in 2001 as part of a larger bill designed to aid the economy through tax relief, economic growth, and other such programs.
Questions:
1. What is your opinion on foreign military aid/ usage?
2. Do you believe that the territories under federal control should be allowed to join the United States by becoming states?
3. Do you believe that we should continue affirmative action programs, or do you believe that we have progressed far enough as a nation that we no longer need them?
Born in Wichita Kansas, on May 3rd of 1949, Senator Ron Wyden attended school in Palo Alto California. He attended college at Stanford, and studied law at the University Of Oregon Law School in Eugene Oregon. He provided legal services to senior citizens from 1977-1979. He was elected as a democratic representative to Congress, and served from 1981-1996.
In 1996 he resigned from Congress, upon being elected to the Senate. He has served on the Senate ever since. Ron Wyden is devoted to making his constituents heard in the Senate. Wyden regularly holds "open to all" town meetings, so that he can hear what his citizens want from him, and from their government. He attempts to reach across the aisle, and reach bipartisan solutions.
Committees:
-
Chairman,
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
- Ex Officio, Subcommittee on Energy
- Ex Officio, Subcommittee on National Parks
- Ex Officio, Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining
- Ex Officio, Subcommittee on Water and Power
-
Senate Committee on Finance
- Chairman, Subcommittee on International Trade, Customs, and Global Competitiveness
- Member, Subcommittee on Energy, Natural Resources, and Infrastructure
- Member, Subcommittee on Taxation and IRS Oversight
- Joint Committee on Taxation
- Senate Committee on the Budget
- Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
- Senate Special Committee on Aging
Senator Ron Wyden supports Abortion, and Stem Cell research. He has also voted in ways that "support" pro-choice, such as allowing minors to cross state lines to receive abortions. He also voted to protect the secrecy of minors who got abortions out of state, by not making it a necessity to contact the parents of aforementioned children. But he did not desire for all teenage girls to become mothers at 16, so he voted to spend $100,000,000 on preventing teen pregnancy by properly educating teenagers, and providing contraceptives.
Wyden's opinions on education is a very liberal standpoint. He has attempted to ensure that all potential college students know the circumstances they shall find in the working world after college. He hopes that this will allow students to make more educate decisions on which college they should attend, what their major should be, and what career path they should follow if they wish to succeed in life. Wyden also authored the College Tuitions Savings Act, which eventually became law in 2001 as part of a larger bill designed to aid the economy through tax relief, economic growth, and other such programs.
Questions:
1. What is your opinion on foreign military aid/ usage?
2. Do you believe that the territories under federal control should be allowed to join the United States by becoming states?
3. Do you believe that we should continue affirmative action programs, or do you believe that we have progressed far enough as a nation that we no longer need them?
Friday, November 8, 2013
John Mitchell
February 21, 1975, sentenced to 2.5-8 years in prison, for involvement of Watergate scandal.
John N. Mitchell was the attorney general under president Nixon. Before that, he was a respected bond lawyer, and he also directed Nixon's political campaign's in 1968, and 1972.
Mitchell was born Detroit Michigan, and grew up in Long Island. He served in the navy for three years during WWII. He served as a municipal bond lawyer from 1938 until 1968 (with the exception of his time spent in the military). Mitchell was married twice, and his second wife became quite famous, in her own right, for pronouncing Mitchell's innocence in the Watergate scandal. The marriage eventually broke up, do to her alcoholism, and "erratic" behavior.
Mitchell was appointed attorney general in January of 1969 by president Nixon, and president Nixon made a strange request to J. Edgar Hoover (director of the FBI) that no background check be run on Mitchell. Mitchell resigned from the post in 1972 to run Nixon's re-election campaign.
Mitchell was a firm believer in the fact that the government needed to enforce "law and order" to protect the citizens of the united states, and that this was more important that a person's civil liberties.
It is believed that his belief in "law and order" are what led him to help organize Watergate. In fact Mitchell is best known for his involvement in the Watergate scandal, in which he was a key player. He evaluated the results of the first Watergate burglary, and also ordered five men to return to fix wire taps, and photograph more documents. Tapes from the oval office, and testimony by those involved established that he was tantamount in planning the break in.
Watergate was a hotel where assorted democratic representatives were meeting to discuss there upcoming campaign. The Watergate scandal, however, was the actions by Richard Nixon, and assorted high ranking republican's to discover what the democrats were planning, and how best to counter their political movements. The Watergate scandal involved wire-taps by the CIA (on the president's orders) and a number of burglaries, to steal democrat information. The Watergate scandal took place in June of 1972.
During the summer of 1973 the United States senate led an investigation into Watergate, and whether or not the burglaries were "illegal, improper, or unethical," and whether they were actually connected to President Nixon. The hearing ranged from discovering if he knew anything about the break-in's, or the cover ups, to Alexander Butterfield announcing there were tapes to prove it. The entire affair ended with Nixon's resignation from the presidential office, in 1974; although John Mitchell was sentenced to prison, and fined $42,000 in 1975.
Bibliography:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_N._Mitchell
http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Fall06/Weiner/pages/People/mitchell.htm
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/05/a-look-back-at-the-senate-watergate-hearings.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)