Blog on a current national news event. If the story is on-line, provide a link. If it is in the paper or news, provide information about where we can find additional information (name/date of paper, etc.). And, yes, the current event has to be political in nature.
18 comments:
In Fridays Lexington herald Leader an article entitled “Children Solicited for sex pictures” gives some scary statistics about how many children have been approached to give out sexual pictures of themselves. Researchers found four percent of American youth have been asked to give out such photos. What was also disturbing was that out of 65 children in a study who said that they had been approached on the internet to provide such photos one had actually given it. Though this seems to be low number researches, physiologist, political leaders and parents feel that even one is too many. This article suggests that conversations about what to do if an approached by an online sexual predator need and must become a common place with our children. However such conversations need to express mores then just the danger and perversion of such people but also the legal implications for children who participate. As such instances become more and more common we must realize and discusses that sometimes it takes two to tango.
As side from being very taken back by the statistic of this article I absolute agree we must get a grip on this. Our children must be made aware of the dangers of sexual predates on the internet. I believe that most of the responsibility falls in the lap of the parents who need to monitor their Childs internet time and places visited online. This can be a very scary and harmful world to an unsuspecting child. With the show “to catch a predator” we can see just how far such people are willing to go and exactly what is out there. Yet this is only on side of the story our children must know that such actions can have huge legal ramifications for them if they willingly participate. I know that many times we want to place the blame only on the predators but many times minors can be the ones violating child pornography laws. Young women want to get the attention of a guy or be told they are sexy so they post sexual pictures of themselves to get attention. In one case in my high school a young man sent sexual pictures of himself to his girlfriend while they were dating. But when they broke up the pictures were then posted all over the internet . In such cases children and minors need to be aware that such actions can a do have majior consequenses.
ashleya said...
The bills also say that children need time out of the classroom in order to improve their lives and prevent “nature deficit disorder” (??????).
See the following link for information regarding nature deficit disorder.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4665933
Well the two parties are gearing up for election time again and here comes health reform. What started out with a bill that received bi-partisan support fro health-care for low-income children has turned into a Medicare reform bill that will surely end up being another battle over a total healthcare reform bill. The president has promised a veto on the bill so it looks like the democrats are not interested in anything more than political posturing in order to gain better public support than they have enjoyed the last few weeks in the poles. In some polls the democratic congress is showing lower poll numbers that President Bush’s Whitehouse. So I see this as an attempt to shore up those poll numbers. I wish congress and the president would get serious about healthcare reform and look for ways in which we could offer affordable health care to every American. In spite of the fact that doing so will be a scary change for some of us who have pretty good health insurance and affordable access to health care; we may need to change the system in order that citizens on the bottom rung of society are able to get medical attention when they need it and at an affordable price. I think it would be wrong for the government to ask health care providers to take less than they do already to see Medicare patients, but somehow we need to take better are of those that are unable to afford decent health care. The following is a link for this story found on the front page of the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/23/washington/23health.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin.
The race to be the Democratic nominee for President is starting to heat up. There is a CNN/YouTube debate between the Democrats for the South Carolina primaries tonight, (Monday, July 23). This debate as CNN believes, will be seven against one; seven of the other candidates against Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton is leading the polls thus far, followed by Barack Obama, and John Edwards. Mrs. Clinton is making her presence known and is leading in the polls. Barack Obama has bypassed Clinton in fundraising and he is the top contender as well. Clinton has voted against a troop funding bill that contained no troop withdrawal deadline and this has separated her from the rest of the Democrats. This fact along with others is an incentive for the Democrats to basically form together and “attack” Clinton and make her ratings go down. Her husband’s presence has also impacted her campaign. The more that President Bush’s popularity diminishes, the more former President Clinton’s grows. Joining together and going after Clinton is the only hope for the other Democratic candidates. They are not even in the double digits in the polls. The race as of now is between Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. There are different scenarios for each state and the race is on between those three. It is going to definitely be a race until the end and an intense one at that. No one is backing down and it is getting really interesting. My decision is still going back and forth between those three candidates and it is going to be a very tough decision to make when that time comes.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/23/sc.debate.preview/index.html
This week, President Bush created a new cabinet-level panel by executive order, to address the problem of how to guarantee the safety and police the import of food and other products. This is on the hills of the recent food scares out of China and the press releases all state that this is not aimed at China, but to all countries that import into the United States. Congress in the past few months have created bills that address the problems of the food safety in the U.S. and it appears that the White House is trying to be seen as doing something on this issue which has become a major concern for many Americans.
“The executive order directs the establishment within the Department of Health and Human Services, a working group, consisting of the Secretaries of Health and Human Services, State, Treasury, Agriculture, Commerce, Transportation, Homeland Security; the Attorney General; the Director of the Office of Management and Budget; the U.S. Trade Representative; the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency; the Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission; and other officers or full-time or permanent part-time employees of the United States (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070718-4.html).”
The mission of this working group is to identify actions and appropriate steps that can be pursued, within existing resources, to promote the safety of imported products, reviewing current procedures to ensure the safety of imported products. Identify and enhance the safety of imported products, safeguard the supply chain, and survey and review practices of Federal, State and local government agencies.” The working group has 60 days to consider all the inputted information and then issue a final report to the President.
To me, I think that the safety of the food supply and in fact, the safety of the domestic food supply should be guaranteed by the government. Hopefully, this working group along with the pending bills in Congress can bring some true changes to how the government insures the safety of imported products and food are free of dangerous and harmful products. I feel that this is a helpful working group, however, it should be made up more than bureaucratic individuals and political appointees. There should be leaders from the food industry, import, and shipping industries as well. I hope that this will be a true look at the problem and not a white washing.
The executive order can be found at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070718-4.html , and stories on the order can be found at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070719/ap_on_go_pr_wh/safe_imports;_ylt=Ag3Eghe0FJYEL.sw9mrPnoYD5gcF titled “Bush creates import safety panel” and at: http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSWBT00727820070718?feedType=RSS under the headline “Bush creates panel to review import safety”
I found my article on yahoo news. Its title is "House rejects campaign pay for spouses." The article basically talks about families being put on the payroll of campaigns. They go on discussing how campaigns have become corrupt in the sense of taking campaign money for their family. Many of these family members put on payroll are considered unqualified for the position they hold. I can understand some family members helping out on the campaign if they are qualified. For instance Hillary Clinton helped out with Bill’s campaign, but now they are saying she wouldn’t be able to do this. So what I take from this is, Bill isn’t aloud to receive pay for helping Hillary. I’m sure a lot of these people running really don’t need the extra money anyways. I guess this is why they are looking at it as being corrupt. If you really think about it, how can you justify if they are qualified or not? If the person running wants to have an incapable worker then that’s their loss. But you have to also realize there is no in-between here. Either you don't let family members in or you do. There is no way of knowing who is really helping or who is in it for the money. So I guess I will have to agree on the House for rejecting campaign members being family. It’s sad that the House of Representative have to discuss topics like this when there are more important things going on in the world.
"Pentagon to junk millions in combat gear"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/military_surplus_shredding;_ylt=AqmTxztIH_6_ZYlAIyVfNbSs0NUE
Millions of dollars' worth of gear, more specifically around 330 million, which includes combat boots, vests, hats/helmets and mechanical parts, is being thrown out by the Pentagon rather than sold or at least saved for later use. Often times this surplus is sold to suppliers which in return sells it back to the military at some point. I feel this is an irresponsible desicion by our national government. Couldn't America use as much money as possible to put back into our economy? How many jobs to middle class workers could have been created if these items were sold to suppliers? Truckers would have had to transport them, work would be needed to get them stored, and the list could continue all the way down the line. The government passed up on giving our economy a boost, however miniscule it may or may not have been. With the national debt rising from the war, couldn't we use all of the help we can get? Also, where did this massive amount of supplies go? They were apparently destroyed; where was this done, and how much environmental damage did it cause?
I feel as if this was a terrible decision all the way around. Wastefulness is not beneficial and can only cause porblems. At the very least couldnt these items have been stored for later use? We are planning on destroying over 1/4 a billion dollars worth of gear. I bet there are a few soldiers stationed in Iraq that wish they could glance through a pile of supplies that massive and grab a few new pieces of equipment/gear. I feel it is sinful to just "destroy" 330 million dollars worth of supplies. I'd be willing to say there is a homeless man somewhere who wishes he had a new pair of boots, its just to bad they will probably be incinerated.
Ashley
How many times have we seen when those type of pictires come back to bite some rising celebrity in the butt, so to speak? People should think about what they are doing. Don't you think?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/07/20/vick.dogfighting/index.html#cnnSTCText
Michael Vick has been one of the NFL’s most prolific quarterbacks in recent years. His career has come to a brief halt while he is being investigated by a federal grand jury. Vick was indicted on charges linked to dog-fighting. His home has been searched and training equipment commonly used for dog-fighting was found. On Monday July, 23, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell ordered that Vick could not show up to his team’s camp on Thursday. This case is receiving a lot of attention from our government and other interest groups. Senator John Kerry sent a letter to Goodell asking him to immediately suspend Vick. Interest groups, such as Humane Society of the United States and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, have also called upon Vick’s suspension. Because of this case Vick is losing endorsement deals, public support, and even his starting job as the Atlanata Falcons starting QB. According to ESPN News last night, the Falcons were set to have a press conference today to discuss the Vick issue and to name former Lions/Dolphins quarterback Joey Harrington as the starting quarterback. I personally think that Vick should be suspended at lest this season. His case is worse than any other case that an NFL player has been involved in. I just don’t get how somebody who is making this much money and is that popular among many people can go and do something like this and ruin his whole reputation.
In response to farber45,
I really hope that Vick gets punished for this cruel, sick thing he did. I will be very angry if he gets off with just a slap on the wrist. It seems that celebrities are not punished anymore and it is almost a joke as to what they have done. Just because the celebrity is rich and is in the media's eye, does not give them the power to do what they want and ignore the rules. It almost seems like the laws are just for us "normal folk". I hope they do more than suspend him for a season. I think it should be much longer than that or maybe even permanent.
In response to Ryan Neff’s comments on the Pentagon junking millions in combat gear. I see this as our government dollars actually going up in smoke. The problem I see is that this war is costing billions of dollars and the troops do not have the right equipment or enough equipment to get the job done, yet the Pentagon was the time to get rid of equipment that can be reused elsewhere. When I was in the Navy reserves, the uniforms that we did not want or could no longer wear because of our ever increasing flab, we donated to the Sea-Cadets, who would reuse the clothing and they appreciated it. I see that the Pentagon can sell this equipment and make money to help finance their war, instead of throwing it away and asking the American taxpayer for more money so they can buy more equipment and supplies. Use what you have, sell what you don’t use and maybe, you can finally come within budget and not have to ask Congress for additional war funding.
Charleston, SC News - online story
http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/jul/25/president_says_u_s_must_defeat_al_qaida_11365/
As I vacation in Myrtle Beach this week, I had heard that President Bush was going to pay Charleston Air Force Base a visit. I decided yesterday morning to drive the two hours to Charleston and just take my chances in seeing some of the commotion related to his visit. I knew I would likely not see President Bush but thought if nothing else I would have the opportunity to at least see Air Force One. Believe it or not, I did see him land in Air Force One and from a great, great distance away, I also saw him. President Bush was in Charleston yesterday to talk to the men and women regarding the war in Iraq. With roughly 18 months left in office, President Bush is up against a lot of skeptical audiences when this topic is discussed. His talk to the men and women was strictly regarding his stance on why our troops were still in Iraq and that he strongly believes that the al-Qaida terrorists’ network goes through Iraq. He stated that America has been attacked overseas by the same terrorists long before we ever went to war in Iraq and due to this, we must stay in Iraq until this fight against terror is complete. A lot of people feel since Iraq is on their feet as far as Hussein being eliminated that the work in Iraq is complete and that is what President Bush was trying to get people to understand because he believes it is not. He feels that we have completed part of our task in being there overpowering Hussein, however with the terrorist still being powerful and present in Iraq, we still have work to do.
I just read on the Herald Leader on-line site that a group of about 250 people plan to rally in Frankfort this coming Monday to protest the domestic partner benefits. This comes months after the University of Louisville and the University of Kentucky implemented domestic partner benefits for university employees. Kentucky law defines marriage, irrationally and rigidly, to be between a man and a woman. The rally would be in support of a new bill, Senate Bill 5, which would deem these implemented programs by our top universities to be unconstitutional.
It seems to me that our society is taking a giant step backwards. The nation’s universities and colleges have most always been the trailblazer for our modern, global worldview. When there are questions to be answered, society turns to the academy. There, in colleges and universities, lies intellect and insight and freedom and equality. The heart of the university toils over medical ethics, scientific breakthroughs, law, education and the well being of our society. We place so much trust in them to be the frontrunner and to light our path to enlightenment, yet now, more than ever, we question them. The core of the issues are dissimilar but the outcome would be the same; when the first black student was admitted to a university, many were probably opposed but now we see how that has brought equality and fairness to our society. This is the work of the university. They are willing to find fault in the system because they are willing to question it. And when the university amends the fault, it is for the common good. The University of Louisville and the University of Kentucky did not implement domestic partner benefits to be liberals or to cause controversy; they did it to increase the common good. If you want to be an oppressor, then it is your right to want to deny rights to others, but do not make our universities be tyrants. How sad!
here's the web address to that story
http://www.kentucky.com/181/story/133380.html
Bill,
I absolutely agree with you! Celebrities seem to be the very worst. Can we say Paris Hilton? Or do you recall the girl on American Idol this year that had the very scandalous pictures of her naked. She was soon off the show after these surfaced. Such pictures can have a very harmful effect on a rising star but also any one who post such trash online of themselves. I guess people don’t realize employers and schools look into those things. The internet though a great tool can as you said come back and bit you on the butt” if not used responsibly. But I guess that is the story with all things if people could just be responsible thinks how much better the worked would be.
This has been all over the news, but I captured a few details from Yahoo News regarding the recent sniping between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. In summary, Obama promises to meet with leaders of adversarial nations in his first year as President while Clinton says that would be a "naive" thing to do. Of course, Obama strikes back, stating that Clinton's refusal to meet with those countries is akin to President Bush's stance on dealing with these nations. The polls show Clinton leading the race for the Democratic nomination. Analysts state on the Today show this morning that the polls as they stand now are an indication of what has happened to this point. The polls are not a predictor as to who will win the nomination. The back-biting among the leading Democrats begins to smell of a repeat of what happened in the Presidential election just prior to our Civil War. The Republicans were unable to present a united front and lost the election to Abraham Lincoln. While the current situation will surely not evolve into a division of the Democratic Party on the whole, I feel such infighting this early in the process will hurt the party. Obama is taking a strong leadership approach in my opinion while Mrs. Clinton suggests a new course for America through reform and legislation. These two approaches have merit, but when both candidates chide each other over which way is best 16 months from the election, strong opinions will surface among the public. I envision supporters of Clinton to vote against Obama and vice versa. The loser's supporters, because of their strong opinions, may vote for the Republican ticket out of spite or simply not vote. The more I talk to people in my community, the more disgusted they are with the negativity in politics. I'm afraid that this situation may rise up and bite the Democrats.
Ashley makes a good point when she says that it takes "two to tango". However I don't think that she stressed enough how important it is for parents to monitor their children's behavior on the Internet. I despise sites like My Space. We had a case at my school where a few students created a My Space account for our principal that did not show him the appropriate light by any stretch of the imagination. The culprits were caught and charges were filed, but the damage had been done. I know that its nearly impossible to monitor our children's actions 24/7, but I'm a firm believer that its OK for parents to tell their kids NO! I didn't intend on getting "preachy" but we, as adults and parents, have got to stop this trend of relying on the government to raise our kids. C'mon, drug testing in schools!? I don't give a rat's backside about the privacy issue. It is the parents' responsibility to watch what their children are doing. So, with that being said, Dr. Patton: I listened to the piece on "Nature Deficit Disorder". Why don't we call it what it really is: Parents too darn lazy to get off the recliner and do something with their kids instead of letting television and the internet raise them.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/07/26/immigrants.ruling/index.html
A federal court Thursday struck down ordinances passed by Hazleton, Pennsylvania, that were intended to limit where illegal immigrants could live and work. Well hello they tried to take a step to solve theproblem and look what happen it was struck down. How are things going to change if they won't take small steps to solving these big matters. There are so many illegal immigrants in Lexington due to the horse farms and tobacco knowing that they are illegal and letting them live and work for you should be fined and even against the law. There are so many jobs that are took by illegal immigrants for less and so much more rent that they have to pay that some have to have several people living with them. i just dont think this should have been one that was struck down I mean come on we all know its a problem they have to have a real big "inside" reason for not passing this one.
chastity
Post a Comment