i just wanted to get other peoples opinions on all the celebrities and musicians getting on the political bandwagon (mostly for kerry). Yes, there is freedom of speech and what not, but i cant help but think its taking too much focus off the politicans themselves. Want some proof?
http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2004/10/27/10928
Taken from our own MN Daily, which granted isnt the greatest newspapers, but nonetheless proves my point. Its great when an article on John Edwards rally, focuses on Ashton Kutcher for the first half of the article. Call me crazy...but I just wanted to know what other people thought.
this is not a pro-anything blog, i was just wondering what people think about the closeness of this election. ill admit i want kerry to win, but i get this sense of dread whenever i see the polls. however, the latest red sox victory has given me hope that anyhthing is possible, so i still have faith. what u guys think? who will win?
If anyone is interested Bush is speaking at the Target Center on Saturday. I'm sure tickets will be coming out soon, but I haven't heard for sure.
Vote November 2nd!
So, why does the media always have to blow things either out of proportion or way way out of proportion? There was a perfect instance of this just the other night. If you haven't heard yet, there was a shooting on 33rd and Colfax Av S in minneapolis. The two wounded occupants in the vehicle were shot in the head and neck. The car was driven by the wounded about 3 blocks to 31rst and Hennepin, where the car finally stopped. Well all that is just fine and dandy but about 20 minutes after all this was said and done, the media caravan showed up. All of a sudden it was a circus....WCCO KSTP KMSP FOX UPN KARE and KSTC were all there. Interested in what would be on the news at 10 I rushed home to be sure to catch the news and had others video tape other channels. All of us waited in awe to see what exactly the media would make out of this crime that had very little details. Well, I was shocked by what I had heard. Information that wasn't even known...or even confirmed was being crammed into the heads of viewers at a pace so rapid it could have been record setting. This or that or white or black, northside, southside, all these comments just being thown out like the news reporters stood there the whole time and were there before it even happened. This is really disapointing...maybe we should really reconsider exactly how accurate the news is...
I went to read some of the latest entries on this blog and I found that not a lot of people have been writing. I was wondering why that is? I know that I have a really hard time thinking of different topics, that don’t have to do with the election, and sometimes I just don’t feel like posting anything. I find it hard to write when I’m not interesting in anything so I posted some different things tonight that might spark some other interesting topics. Hopefully I have inspired some of you to do the same!
A week from tomorrow everyone will be filling the voting polls, where will you be? Everyone Remember to vote on November 2nd…you too can make a difference!
I’m not sure if everyone in this class lives on campus or not but I was wondering if you all feel safe while walking around the campus area? I know that a little over a week ago a man was shot and killed not far from where I am living and it gave me a shakes. I guess it comes from being a little sheltered from my parents and living in a relatively safe city, but I get a little uneasy when I walk around with my friends at night. I know that as a girl and even as guy it is considering unsafe to walk alone on campus, I guess I just wish I could feel safe outside my house, or in my house for that matter, and walking home from class. Let me know what you think about the issue because even though it might seem far removed it could happen to anyone.
Ok, so I was reading one of my roommates trashy, and I say that in the nicest possible way, magazines today and I starting thinking about how horrible it must be to be famous. Just looking through the ‘faces and places’ section, which features the celebrity spotting, and it was a special on how celebrities are just like you and me. For example all the pictures were of the famous guy/girl doing normal things….in other words they were being stalked by photographers in places like the grocery store and the gas station. So, then I asked myself why would anyone want this? I know I wouldn’t, it would be annoying. Then I realized this it’s what they asked for but it’s also part of the job description these days. Another thing I though about while flipping through the magazine was why am I reading this? Why are people so obsessed with other people, only the other people are on TV and in the movies? I can’t say for sure why but I do now that my roommate is directly fueling this cycle by giving money back to the magazines who pay the photographers. Kind of weird I guess, what do you think?
Here is a letter that I recently received in the mail that was very pro Kerry. I thought I would share it with everyone to see what he or she thought.
Kerry Wants drinking water protections in regulations; abide by the new arsenic standard.
Bush wants more arsenic in drinking water; he tried to block reducing arsenic in drinking water.
Kerry wants to reduce air pollution for public healthy; supports regulations for cleaner air.
Bush wants more sorcery in the air and fish; less regulation of air pollution
Kerry wands adherence to the Clean Water Act; supports protections of species
Bush wants fewer natural wetlands; less protection for biodiversity
Kerry wants science-based public health standards; science-based environmental regulations
Bush wants industry to decide on standards for public health and on environmental regulations
Kerry wants a major thrust to develop renewable energy to stop our dangerous dependence on oil
Bush wants continued dependence on oil, not on safer, renewable energy sources.
Kerry understands global warming is real, and our energy uses helps cause it
Bush believes global climate change is natural, says carbon dioxide is “not a pollutant!”
Kerry believes environmental regulations will benefit our economy create new jobs
Bush believes government’s environmental regulations harm the economy
I just heard that at Coffman today or off line : johnkerry.com/twincities you can get free tickets to see Kerry speak tomorrow (thursday) speak at the metrodome. Its not a bad thing to see, considering the election is so close.
"If a person is a practicing homosexual, they should not be teaching in our schools." DeMint later said he felt the same "if a single woman who is pregnant and living with her boyfriend should be hired to teach my third-grade children." - Candidate for senator from South Carolina, Jim DeMint
I don't understand why anyone who is running for office in this country can get away with gay bashing and single-mom bashing and not recieve large amounts of public backlash. If he said that Chinese or Jews or African-Americans shouldn't be allowed to teach in schools, there would surely be a large backlash against him (remember what happened to Trent Lott?). But no, he picks two groups in america that are still widely discriminated against. A person's sexuality has NOTHING to do with their ability to teach children math or science, nor does any other marital status. A single mom can just as easily teach as any married man or woman. While the senator later said he "regretted the comments", he never did apologize for them. In a country where we are already falling short of quality teachers, i don't think we should be discouraging anyone from trying to be a teacher. Besides, a teachers private life is just that, PRIVATE. The government has no right to say who can or can't teach based on their private life, as long as their private life isn't harming anyone (yes, i will concede that pedophiles, rapists, murderers and the like should NOT be allowed to be teachers). A government is supposed to protect its citizens. By electing senators like this, all we are doing is alienating groups, and if you get enough alienated groups, you could have a pretty big problem on your hands. Seriously, please think before you vote, and don't vote for any candidates that are just using their bigotry to distract people from the real issues in life.
Last weekend, my friends and I rented the movie "Super Size Me!" It is about a man who is in peak physical health who decides to eat nothing but McDonald's for 30 days. He must eat three meals a day and if they ask him if he wants to supersize it, he must say yes. Well, the film was both entertaining and educational. It included many statistics about america's obesity problem, as well as how McDonald's makes some of it's food (which I found to be quite disturbing). The results are really shocking, and I know I won't be eating fast food for a while. I encourage you all to see it if you haven't already.
As I finished reading an article published by our U of M Daily paper on the 5.5 percent tuition I was left with the idea that the author was strongly in favor of the increase. While I personally feel that increase is not completely necessary, I understand that higher education in our stare is receiving less funding due to our attempt to offset our debt. Being that our state is in debt and I feel it is important to decrease and eventually eliminate this debt. Since our University is also seeking help through generous philanthropy and raising numerous funds I can understand the desire of the board of directors to increase tuition. Considering no other increases in the near future are attempted after this I see this increases as beings positive if the University can show that the money obtained through this increase and extended donations is making a difference towards many student learning experience.
I just rented Farenhype 9/11 the other day, which is a movie that discredits a lot of Michael Moore's points he made in his film, Farenheit 9/11. Yes, although it too is sending large amounts of prophaganda, it was really interesting to see the full context of the speeches Moore used in his film. It really shows how he manipulated what people said in a pretty sleezy manner. Although its not enough to make me vote for Bush, its still nice to see that crazy liberal discredited that much moore. But I just wanted to know what other people thought of this film!
Did anyone happen to see the Bush campaign in Oregon? I tuned in and there's a few things I would like to say about it. First of all, I think that (compared to Bush's other speeches) Bush had some good information. I liked how he said that in the past 3 and a half years, the countries of the Middle East have done a complete 180. Women are able to vote and freedoms are being granted to the people there. Weather or not the information is true is totally beyond me. I'm not over there and I can't determine if what Bush was saying is the truth. I guess its all about what you believe. I will say though that Bush did sound convincing and he brought up some good points. What does everyone else think about Bush's speech in Oregon?
I found this article for my analysis in assignment 3. It is too long to post the whole thing so I will just summarize.
Basically it starts out by pointing out that the American society is driven by exploring and conquering new frontiers - first the "new world", then the west, then the moon. But without a new frontier to explore, as is the case now, our society will stagnate and decay. The rate of invention and implementation of new technologies is on a steady decline, we are in general becoming less and less ambitious and motivated.
But there IS still a frontier left to explore - Mars. We have the ability to send a manned expedition - in fact, we have had it for some time. In addition, Mars has what we need for a colony and life - water in the form of permafrost and ice caps, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, metals, silicon, phosphorus, sulfur,and inert gases. It is also rich in a rare isotope of hydrogen, deuterium, used in nuclear fusion reactions. All it would take is a bit of terraforming.
A mission to colonize Mars would jump-start our economy, with the settlers and their colleagues back home both working to develop better and better technologies, such as faster space travel, faster communication methods, and fusion power. The mission would create numerous new job opportunities - labor would be a precious commodity on the new planet.
Why not the oceans or the moon? After all, they are closer. But the oceans are too close to other governments, colonies would get entangled in messy politics. And the moon doesn't have the necessary elements and compounds to support a colony.
Some of the following isn't in the article, it is my own thoughts:
Once a colony on Mars was established, it would be a pleasant alternative to life on Earth. Think about it - the only diseases there would be the ones we brought with, which could easily be exterminated while they were still in a small area. Lower gravity is good news for the senior citizens, as it would most likely reduce back pain and arthritis. On Mars, we could set up a totally new, world-wide democratic government. 'Countries' would become a thing of the past. Also, Mars would serve as a backup plan, in case we nuked ourselves on Earth or if a big meteor hit Earth and destroyed us, we wouldn't all die, just some of us.
The mission would also help things out back home on Earth, serving to potentially unite multiple countries in a joint effort to colonize it. In addition, new technologies developed on Mars could also be used here.
Mars isn't science fiction anymore, we have the technology, we have the funds, we have the ability, we only need the motivation.
I wanted to comment on a previous post this week because I find that I can write comments better then my own topics. I stopped and thought about what was on my mind and found that our countries current position in foreign affairs has cause one of my good friends that I graduated with to be diverted Iraq and now one of my three roommates is being called up by his army reserve division to “aid those in hostile territories”. I sit here and feel worried about the future of my friends and also realize that about three years ago when I was in my first week of high school the morning of Sep. 11 all the T.V. in the school came on with the news of a terrible accident and then the truth of a terrible attack. While I feel that life is far more precious than any other thing on this earth. People have fought and died for us to retain our freedoms and our way of life has always continued. Our present fight against terror will be no different I see our country prevailing together and again improving life as we know it. I see a lot of people who feel that our fight should not have been started, but I just can’t forget that “a group” along with many other groups in the past have attacked our way of life. They took thousands of innocent lives to make their message and I know every American felt it as I did. With all the bull shit surrounding the war I am happy to say I can see good being done and I feel we will leave a positive impact when finished with our goals of stopping mass terror. I understand that we cannot rid the world of terror because of human nature it will always exist, but I do feel it is important for our country to show our seriousness towards planned mass murder. As for my friend in the line of harm I hope to see them again soon and hear first hand about the good our country can bring
During the presidential debate last week, Bush accused Kerry of being a liberal. And when said that, he intended to create in peoples' minds the image of a person who taxes relentlessly to finance wasteful spending.
But that is not the definition of a true liberal.
A true liberal stands for tolerance in the face of bigotry. She stands for the civil liberties of her fellow citizens against government violation. He is not afraid to stand up for the common good - for the interests of ALL Americans - and realizes that the common good sometimes costs money. But above all else, liberals strive to fullfill the twin promises of America - freedom and equal opportunity.
This country has a proud liberal tradition - a tradition that I am proud to be a part of.
Don't let anyone fool you. Liberal is not a dirty word.
Has this happened to anyone else the past couple days? I was sitting around at the Student Center and then there were a couple people conducting a voting survey and they wanted to know how many students were going to vote in this year's election. The survey had questions about who you were voting for and what are some issues that mean the most to you. The troubling thing for me was that the people conducting this survey were wearing shirts that said (pardon my language) "Fuck Bush." Now, I don't know about you but if I were to vote for Bush and someone came up to me asking me to fill out their survey while wearing "Fuck Bush" shirts, I would feel a little uncomfortable about it. I would rather hear about why they didn't like Bush instead of a "fuck Bush" t-shirt because they didn't give their view about why they feel like that. I don't know, can anyone comment on this?
I'm sure that everyone read the Minnesota Daily today and saw that we might have the pleasure of going through a 5.5% tuition increase. I know that in comparison to what the increase Could be that we might be considered lucky, but I still am not at all thrilled about it. I think that the state ought to make education a priority and start contributing more to institutions like the University of Minnesota. I was just wondering what other people's opinions were on this topic.
"On Thursday House Republican negotiators rejected a Senate-approved proposal to include crimes targeting gay men and lesbians in the nation's federal hate-crimes law.
The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act (LLEEA) would have added real or perceived sexual orientation, gender and disability to federal hate crime laws, thus allowing the federal government the ability to provide assistance for the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes based on these categories.
Current hate crime laws cover offenses based on race, color, religion or national origin." - Planetout news network
I personally feel that this is goverment sponsored homophobia. This bill passed with fairly large bipartisan support in both the senate (65-33) and in the house of reps (213-186). The bill was struck down by the republican leadership of the house of representatives, even after broad support from congress. This shows clear bias against gays. If they are going to have hate crime laws, they shouldn't exclude certain groups from coverage. This law basically says that its ok to beat someone for being gay, but its not ok to beat them for being catholic. beating a person is always wrong. I honestly feel the need for a hate crimes law in general to be a bit extreme (a beating is a beating, its always going to be wrong, why should it be more wrong because of sexual identity or race or any other factor) but if they are going to have a bill protecting groups from crime, then it should be all inclusive. It should not be limited to only the heterosexual population, it should not be limited to only gays, it should not be only based on race, age, or gender, it should take EVERYTHING into account. Because the addition to the bill protecting the gay/lesbian community (however, this bill did leave out transgendered people) was over ruled, i feel that this is a blatant example of homophobia in the goverment, the very people who should be there protecting us. I urge everyone to think not only about the war in iraq in the coming election, but to also think about the civil rights of americans, and support candidates that support everyone. If they can veto laws that would protect millions of americans, just imagine what else they can do with a guilt-free conscience.
Response to September 30 Federal Marriage Amendment thread
This group of comments is worth my commentary.
First, this site is for the political opinions of all members of 1101 along with the possibility of outside commentary. I requested that you treat each other with respect and civility.
Gay rights is not a silly or sarcastic issue and I would respectfully request that each student posting to this blog remember that their perspective and opinion is ONE perspective.
Furthermore, comments suggesting incest and bestiality are irrelevant and childish and I would encourage all those reading and commenting to this blog remember one fundamental consideration of rhetoric. That being the consideration of Audience.
Many in this country feel that gay civil rights is the equivalent to the civil rights movements of our past (woman and black).
Many ask the questions:
Why shouldn’t one gay partner be able to visit their partner (spouse) in the hospital? Why shouldn’t a partner have the right to joint property purchased during their time together should death or separation occur? Why should one gay parent lose all rights to their adopted children because they aren’t legally married and therefore only one partner was allowed to be named on the adoption papers?
These are serious questions that deserve serious consideration.
When reading the following questions ask yourselves is one question so different from another?
Why should one member of a society be less deserving of rights because of their sexual orientation?
Why should one member of a society be less deserving of rights because of their gender?
Why should one member of a society be less deserving of rights because of their color?
Why should one member of a society be less deserving of rights because of their age?
Why should one member of a society be less deserving of rights because of their handicap?
Make no mistake tax breaks/benefits are a right in this country. Therefore, why shouldn’t gay and lesbian couples have the same rights and benefits as a heterosexual couple? Not all hetero couples produce children therefore the idea that marriage is solely about propagation doesn’t work here.
In short, in the future respect your audience!
This class may contain gay and lesbian members. Likewise, your audience may contain relatives/friends of gays and lesbians. I respect differing opinions on the issues. However, denigrating the issue or another person is not an opinion and need not occur.
I would like to comment on the gun control issue recently brought up. I feel that the conceal and carry law recently passed in our state has not disturbed any law biding citizens safety. In fact if you understand the issue and surrounding facts you can see that not just anyone can obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Also, the fact that there are now a select number of citizens in our state able to protect themselves with a concealed weapon legally, it can act as a large deterrent towards those trying to cause harm through a crime such as assault. When I first became familiar with this change in state law I knew that unless unfortunate problems occurred with in the beginning of the change that we could adapt to a new understanding of hand guns and eventually stop the fear. It is unfortunate that people hurt others every day and this is something that we have lived with for a long time. Guns are dangerous when misused but, people who understand and most importantly respect them present no danger to me in my mind. There for I feel that the conceal and carry law presents no danger to me or the other citizens of our state.
Why is Bush so insistent on having open talks, involving China, Russia, etc., about nuclear weapons with North Korea? Given that if North Korea develops nuclear capabilities (which it apparently has already), N. Korea would be a threat to the surrounding countries. However, can’t the U.S. have “bilateral” talks with N. Korea? Sure these talks would only involve the U.S. and N. Korea, but who is to stop the other surrounding countries from also having bilateral talks with N. Korea?
Danny Liu
October 5, 2004
Why is it so hard for people to buckle up when they get in a car? It takes less than 5 second, it's the law, and IT CAN SAVE YOUR LIFE!!!!! People seem to have a million reasons for not wearing a seatbelt.
"I don't have time."
"It's too uncomfortable."
"I'm not going that far."
So what if you don't want to buckle up! People would rather die in a car accident than take the time to put on a seatbelt? I'm sure laying in a hospital bed is more uncomfortable than wearing a seatbelt. Even if you're not going very far, that doesn't stop a drunk, speeding driver to ram into your car from any direction.
Why do people choose risking theirs lives over wearing a seatbelt? I just don't get it.
Stem Cell Research has been an issue for years; whether or not to use fetuses for stem cell research. This is one of John Kerry's main focus on the presidential race. He talked with a high school in Hampton, New Hampshire, with actor Michael J. Fox, about the positive effects of stem cell research. If you don't know, Michael J. Fox is suffering from the illness Parkinson's diesease. I think that stem cell research would help this world a great deal, but using fetuses for science just doesn't float-the-boat for some people. The way I see it is that the scientists that have to handle the fetuses must only use them in extreme situations. Curing cancer or brain malfunction would be a good reason to use a fetus. It seems like they can just do whatever they feel like doing.
Well may I say...Kerry is quite a master of rhetoric. He was very composed and very prepared. Every response started with an introduction, a developing body, and a conclusion. Bush on the other hand stumbled around and around the same subject with every response (and leaned on the podium I might add). I believe I heard him mistake Osama Bin Laden with Saddam Hussein as well...Is that the man that we really want to run the country for the next four years? He had absolutely no reasoning behind anything he had to say and all he could argue was that Kerry had no permanent stand on anything. Well according to that debate...it seemed that Kerry at least had a stand.
I would like to pose an example of a costitutional issue. The new (well use to be new) law called conceal and carry law was also a contraversial one. Now, I understand that privatly owned buisneses were alowed to post a sighn banning guns in their buildings, but can the public university do this, since they are government owned, meaning they get tax money? and are the dorms governemt owned also? I know that a privit college can do whatever they would like, but what about a public university?