Patriot of '76

SOTUesday

2012-01-24T18:29:00.001-06:00

Blog the State of the Union with me

Blog the GOP debate with me

2012-01-23T07:56:00.002-06:00

Blog the 10/18 GOP debate with me

2011-10-18T12:23:00.002-05:00

FInal Review

2009-05-24T09:53:00.001-05:00

Click here for a review podcast for the College Prep. Govt. final examination

2009-01-08T12:10:00.001-06:00

2009-01-07T08:53:00.000-06:00

Watch CBS Videos Online

Constitution Test review

2008-12-22T09:20:00.001-06:00

Click here for US and IL. Constitution Test review

CHOOSEday!!

2008-11-04T15:32:00.002-06:00

Blog with me as the results come in!

last Con Law assignment

2008-11-03T14:00:00.000-06:00

Write one sentence on Sen. Barack Obama’s positions on each of these issues

1. Abortion/women’s right to chose

2. Gay Marriage

3. Affirmative Action in college admission

4. Should you be punished more severely for a crime if you’re in a gang?

5. Merit pay for teachers?

6. Free college?

7. Guns

8. Torture accused terrorists?

9. Should we deport illegal immigrants?

10. Should wealthy pay more taxes?

11. Iraq

12.

13.
Write one sentence about Sen. John McCain on each of these issues:

1. Abortion

2. Gays in the military (Don’t ask don’t tell)

3. Gay marriage

4. Death penalty

5. Teaching creation instead of evolution

6. School vouchers

7. 527 groups

8. Guns

9. Torture (waterboarding)

10. Deport illegal immigrants?

11. Should we raise taxes for rich?

12. Should we get out of Iraq? Why?

13.

14.

Con Law assignment

2008-10-31T18:24:00.002-05:00

Name:

www.ontheissues.org

Governor Sarah Palin on

1. Does the constitution guarantee a right to privacy?

2. Abortion is a ________issue

3. Stem cell research

4. Gay Marriage

5. Death Penalty

6. Teach creationism?

7. Offshore drilling for Oil

8. Is global warming man made?

9. Support Israel in preemptive strike with Iran?

10. 2nd amendment

11. Universal health care?

12. ?

13.

Joe Biden on:

1. Abortion

2. Federal funding for contraception

3. Gay Marriage

4. Illegalize flag burning

5. Affirmative Action

6. Hate Crime legislation

7. Illegalize smoking

8. No Child Left behind

9. How to deal with our foreign enemies

10. Guns

11. Illegal immigrants and drivers licenses

12. Iraq War

Con Law assignment

2008-10-30T11:43:00.000-05:00

Name:

Dans Seals (Democrat) vs. Mark Kirk (Republican)

www.dansealsforcongress.com

Dan Seals

Background (experience, college, etc..)

Sum up his stance on:

1. Iraq

2. Health Care

3. Drilling in ANWR (Environment)

4. Immigration (focus on what do to about illegal immigrants already here)

5. Israel (be specific)

6. Abortion

7. Hate Crimes

8. Warrantless Wiretapping

Mark Kirk (R-IL)

http://www.ontheissues.org/IL/Mark_Kirk.htm

Background (www.kirkforcongress.com)

Sum up his stance on:

1. Abortion

2. Gay Marriage (Civil Rights)

3. Gun Control

4. Soft Money

5. What to do with those without health care

6. Warrentless wiretaps

7. Immigration

8. Bush Tax cuts

9. Aid to Israel

Last Chance!

2008-10-15T13:14:00.002-05:00

Townhall Tangle!

2008-10-07T15:18:00.001-05:00

Blog with me!

Con Law Extra Credit

2008-10-06T11:20:00.001-05:00

From today's Washington Post

Supreme Court's Direction Hinges on Who Wins '08 Race
A McCain Victory May Tilt Balance

By Robert Barnes
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, October 6, 2008; A02

There were not many conspicuous tributes to the legacy of President Bush at last month's Republican National Convention, but there was at least one.

It was a campaign button with the words "Thanks, W" across the top and photos of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. beneath the letters.

Conservative legal activists view the two men as remarkable successes in Bush's quest to move the court to the right, and that is part of the reason that, as the court begins its work anew today, public attention is focused less on the cases at hand than on the court's future.

It is a future entirely dependent on whether Sen. John McCain or Sen. Barack Obama prevails in November.

"A President Obama or a President McCain will likely be handed an opportunity to affect the makeup of the Supreme Court that is unprecedented in our history," said Wendy Long, chief counsel for the Judicial Confirmation Network, which was active in generating public support for the confirmations of Roberts and Alito.

Obama, supported by a strongly Democratic Senate, could be presented with three openings during his first term, said Walter Dellinger, a prolific Supreme Court practitioner who was acting solicitor general in the Clinton administration.

He said it likely that Justices John Paul Stevens, 88, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 75, and David H. Souter, 69, would step down in the next four years if Obama were elected.

"President Obama is going to be able, I think, to name whoever he wishes to the court and have that person confirmed," Dellinger said last week during a discussion at the Institute of Bill of Rights Law at William and Mary Law School.

But whether that would alter the court's basic dynamic is hardly clear.

The court is roughly balanced on important constitutional issues, with four consistent conservatives, four liberals and, in the middle, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who leans right on many issues but often joins liberals on some of the court's most controversial decisions.

Replacing liberals Stevens, Ginsburg and Souter with similar-minded justices would infuse the left wing of the court with younger leadership but leave the basic balance intact.

"What you really want to do in reshaping the court is change the median justice," said John McGinnis, a constitutional law expert and professor at Northwestern University. "That changes a lot more votes in the long run than just exchanging one liberal for another or one conservative for another."

To that end, advantage McCain.

The ages of the justices -- Souter is the youngest on the left, and Antonin Scalia is the oldest on the right at 72 -- favor the likelihood that the first opening would come from the liberal side. Stevens, although robust and in good health, is the second-oldest justice in the court's history. The fourth liberal is Justice Stephen G. Breyer.

Replacing one of the liberal justices with a consistent conservative such as Roberts and Alito -- the two McCain has said would serve as models for his picks -- could have far-reaching consequences on issues such as abortion, church-state separation, racial preferences and executive privilege.

But, as other presidents have found, justices take seriously their lifetime appointments and their legacies.

"We know from history that people generally do not leave the court when they're going to be replaced by someone they don't think is very much like them ideologically," McGinnis said.

Even if McCain has the chance to replace one of the liberals, he would face a formidable obstacle if Democrats control more than 55 seats in the Senate.

"It would be impossible for him to get somebody who's extremely conservative confirmed in . . . a Democratic Senate," said lawyer Miguel Estrada, whose nomination to a federal appellate court was blocked by Democrats.

McCain's best bet to appoint someone close to his "ideological ideal point," McGinnis said, would be to nominate a woman or a minority, who might be more difficult for Democrats to oppose. The last three appointments to the court have been white men, and there has never been a Hispanic justice.

Although there is no doubt the candidates would appoint very different people to the high court and lower federal judgeships, they also present a striking contrast in how they might approach the job.

Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago, known for its analytic approach to the law, and would rely on his own thoughts on constitutional theories, said Cass R. Sunstein, a former colleague now at Harvard Law School and an informal Obama adviser.

"He knows these issues," Sunstein said. "I'd be very surprised if he wasn't extremely involved" in choosing nominees," Sunstein said, though he added that he has not had conversations with Obama about the qualities the Democrat would seek in a nominee.

Obama opposed Roberts and Alito and has mentioned Ginsburg, Souter and Breyer as models, although it was unclear whether he was looking only at the current court, rather than past justices, for examples.

Obama said in a speech this year that the court is in agreement much of the time. But on the important constitutional issues that divide the justices, "adherence to precedent and rules of construction will only get you through 25 miles of the marathon," Obama said.

"That last mile can only be determined on the basis of one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works and the depth and breadth of one's empathy."

McCain mocked such standards in a speech in May on the role of the judiciary, calling them "vague words" that "attempt to justify judicial activism."

McCain said he would appoint judges "who have a proven record of strict interpretation of the Constitution of the United States."

The Judicial Confirmation Network's Long said McCain's speech offered more details than "any presidential candidate in history" about the qualities he would look for in judges. But the judiciary has not been one of McCain's areas of specialty during his long tenure in the Senate, and others describe his interest as more of an outreach to conservatives, who consider the issue very important and have had a sometimes rocky relationship with him.

When the court narrowly decided that detainees held in the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have the right to access federal courts, McCain called it one of the "worst decisions in history." Asked two months later what prompted such a strong denunciation, he said: "Sometimes I'm given to a little hyperbole."

Both men have ready evidence that even justices they hold up as examples do not always decide issues the way they would like. Roberts and Alito are deeply suspicious of McCain's landmark legislative accomplishment, the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill, and have voted to strike parts of it as unconstitutional.

Likewise, Ginsburg and Breyer were in the majority of a case that Obama said was wrongly decided, when they struck down the death penalty for the rape of a child.

Even the charge of "judicial activism" -- which is sometimes measured by a court's readiness to overrule legislation approved by a democratic body -- is becoming harder to define. Liberals, along with Kennedy, rejected Congress's mandate on the legal options for terrorism detainees. Conservatives, along with Kennedy, set aside the District of Columbia's gun-control law.

"The parties often argue about which is the party of judicial activism and which is the party of judicial restraint," Dellinger said. "I think it's pretty much a scoreless tie."

Second amendment

2008-10-03T09:59:00.001-05:00

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

In your opinion, does the second amendment protect individuals or groups? Do you agree with the Heller decision?

Blog the Palin-Biden Debate!

2008-10-02T16:20:00.000-05:00

Check our Mr. Larsen's and Mr. Conneen's blog:

www.cbs2chicago.com/school

Debate 1...Mangle in Mississippi

2008-09-26T12:32:00.002-05:00

The debate is on. What are your thoughts?

Lee v. Weisman

2008-09-23T15:59:00.002-05:00

Writing for the majority opinion, Justice Kennedy said "If citizens are subjected to state‐sponsored religious exercises, the government itself fails in its duty to guard and respect that sphere of inviolable conscience and belief which is the mark of a free people"

Was the case, in your opinion, and establishment clause violation?

US History Review

2008-06-01T09:54:00.008-05:00

Click here for questions 1-10

Click here for questions 21-30

Click here for questions 40-50

Click here for questions 51-60

Click here for questions 61-70

Click here for 91-94

MORE REVIEW

2008-05-04T20:58:00.001-05:00

QtLS11 has joined this chat.
there we go
C rA zZ y 4U192 has joined this chat.
Elbs i don't get these frqs
dask8er144 has joined this chat.
hook it up
how's everyone doing
do we need to know the difference between coopererative, competitive, and creative federalism?
i like the pink elbaum
it's the new black
elbs, can u like steel the frq prompts and tell us what they are
steal*
wish I could
any predictions for the frq?
what do you need to know about legislative powers of bureaucratic agencies?
i was at barns and noble today and there was this huge book opn Polk
8:00 PM
i bought it and read it
legislative powers of Bure...
yeah
for an frq
the FCC makes policy on what words you can and cant say
on tv
so an executive agnecy is given legislative powers
and judicial powers
because they fine tv stations if they violate
like the FCC fined FOX for the janet jackson super bowl incident
got it
wut a ho
so they get judicial and legislative powers
yes
whats judicial federalism
bureaucracy---think like shs
very big, many levels, hard to know who is to blame, can do many things
are very expensive
(thats why you couldn't go to ur conference right elbaum)
right
what about social security
and entitlement programs

y r u crying?
entitlement programs are federally funded programs guarenteed to go to certain groups from the budget every year
they make up MOST of the federal budget
social security is the biggest
medicare, medicaid
welfare
can someone explain plurality
welfare is hared between states and fed. right?
right
k
plurality is simply getting more votes than the next guy
hisham i told u that!
aite
i don't believe u
majority is 50 percent plus 1
okay, and we have just plurality
need a plurality to win a sate
8:05 PM
majority of electoral votes to win the election
can u explain cannot vs do not voters again
cannot---under 18, felons in some states, non citizens, ppl who dont register
do not---minorities, poor, renters, low education, non religious
what kind of primaries force straight ticket voting
closed
ok
im going to change my icon
to polk?
who is that
Anyone know?
who polk or the icon
larry david
the icon's jfk
yes larry david
who is larry david
seinfeld creator
stanley from the office?
yes..any other questions
also curb your enthusiasm creator /star
whats the difference between the pres pro tempore and the Vp with regards to the power over the senate
vp is the president of the senate
period
when the vp is gone, prez pro temp steps in at prez of the senate
do we need to know who they are
liek who the pro tempore is
prez pro temp is usually the member in the majority party with most seniority
no you dont need names
do we need to know supreme court justices and who appointed them
8:10 PM
but the prez pro temp is robert byrd
former clansmen
nope no SCOTUS names
hahahah
are u serious
yea
wait what is appelate mean
about the clansman...
from west va
like appealte jurisdiction
that means when the court gets their case from a lower court
do we need to know the diffeent types of federalism liek competitive and cooperative and the creative
so the SC has appealate and original juriscdiction
original means
it is created liek in that court
hard to predict if you'll need different kinds of federalism
original means when a court is the first to hear a case
so lower courts only have original
k got it
can u explain them
cooperative when local state and ntl work togther to solve problems rather than make different policies
dual is when the state and federal are completely supreme
autonomous
anyone got the cubs game on?
yes
duh its me
any other questions
im actually watching star wars episode III
you all know that there is a review tonight 9-11pm on am 560
yeh
what is it going over
8:15 PM
r u gonna listen elbaum
the review
I'm going to call in
haha
nicce
is it a national broadcast?
I'm not sure
ok
what would u say study the most
on
do you guys know the CLAUSES of teh 14th amendment
due process?
no
due process
equal protection?
equal protection
wait can u go over all the important amendments
rsharu109 has joined this chat.
1 amendment
that has establishment/free excercise?
makes sure you know free exercise vs. free establshment
free excercise means no established religion right
2nd---riht to bear arms, not selectively incorporated
i mean estalbismhemt sorry
will it be you think?
4th--privacy even though teh word was never mentioned
depends if obama/hrc or Mac wins
Mac puts 2 conservative ont he court to replace JPS and Gins
then the court leans to the right for a LOOOOONG time
that'll be brutal
wait i thought they can stay on for life
8:20 PM
how old his gins that shes down for the count
ginzburgs got some life left in her
speaking of 4th, that is a great time to ask about judicial activism vs. strict constructionism
strict is when it liek intereprests the constutituon strictly word for word right
activism- using the bench to push an agenda or influence public policy, strict - literal constitution, CT money style, and its just silly
yup
right
"just silly"
do u think activism is immoral or unconstitutional
that's a thomas reference I assume
u know it
ct money
do we need to knwo the SALT treaty
Well, the original argument makes sense...if you want abortion to be universal then PASS A LAW...conressman are democratically elected vs. justices who never face voters
and the START
no SALT treaty
ic
that's more APUSH
we never learned that?
what about the judiciary and public opinon
insulated because they never run for office
no term limits
lifetime appt
no insulated because can be impeached
get appointed by prez (elected)
confirmed by senate (elected)
can't their salaries not be reduced too (as a point for insulation)?
right
good memory
8:25 PM
but they want to have a good image right
legacy
yes but there are stronger reasons for lack of insulation
do they really care that much about legacy
hard to tell
these frqs that you'll see tomorrow were written 4 years ago
last year they asked about grants vs. mandates vs categorical
are u proctoring
No
so they wont ask about that this year
really? why are they written so long ago
what else did they ask about last year
I'll expect a great slow clap right before the test
ha
they asked about some court cases
omg i forgot about the court cases
what are the important ones
mapp v. ohio
lalapgovernment.blogspot.com
ellis
thank you
what should we look over for the FRQ's or is there nothing really we can do
well, think big picture questions that you can support with specifics
like, why is the Senate the upper house and House the lower
or something
haha um why
but it's impossible to predict
senate is national
house is liek local issues?
like tax issues
Think cup and saucer
Senate cools legislation or action
8:30 PM
house impeaches, senate actually puts prez on trial
think requirements---senate gotta be 30
and house has to impress public right
serve 6 years
right
only serve 2 years
always facing the people
wait senate is the cup? and house is saucer
vice versa
ohh
k
senate cools the house
kk
are there formal requirments to be a federal judge?
whats the standing committee do
no
k
well lawyer...
standing committees are specialized groups in congress
that's most action occurs
dont most bills die there
yes
its called getting pigeonholed
so a frosh senator who is a former farmer will get put on the ag committee
what are the age requirements for senate n house?
30 senate
25 house
k thanks!
yup
9 year residency in house
i mean 7
9 for senate
when did the vp get added to the ballot, and the runner up stopped being hte vp?
8:35 PM
what's a split ticket?
whats preferred position
12th amendment
split ticket is when you vote for some dems and some reps
gotcha!
thanks
pref position is when rights are being considered byt eh SCOTUS, they give the first amendemt priority
they always try to uphold it over orthers
bayle wants u to reinvite her
she got kicked out
whats the diff b.w PAC's intrest groups and lobbyist
do we need to know all the stuff about foreign policy?
jay, 12th amendment requires electors to cast one vote for prez and one for VP
so guy who comes in 2nd isnt VP like it used to be
got it , thanks
so can electors vote for non running mates?
CoolJul8 has joined this chat.
hey elbaum! i'm getting really nervous for this test! less than 24 hours away!
not really because POTUS candidates run with VP so the vote is one in the same
almost D-day!
what is appelate jurisdiction?
8:40 PM
i was using the review packet and it mentioned it but i am blanking out on what it is
QtLS11 has left this chat.
app jurisdiction means when a court hears a case from a lower court
like when it makes its way up the ranks
from something like a district court?
gotcha. thanks!
right
jgarv11 has joined this chat.
whats the diff b.w PAC's intrest groups and lobbyist
elbaaaaauuuummmmmmm
and also, in terms of mapp v. ohio, was that the one regarding breaking into her home for one thing and then arresting her for another? does that fall under a privacy issue?
PACS try to elect people
interrest groups rtry to influence legislation
mapp v ohio is eclusionary rule
and lobbyists?
which means that any evidence obtained illegally cant be used against you
lobbyist tries to influence legislation
ok, thanks. so the privacy issue would go more towards roe v. wade?
i was working on a practice frq
and griswold
and griz
right
griswold was the fist privacy case
over birth control
8:45 PM
oh, u mean the one i missed on my circle of death- escuse me, destiny- question. lol
probably better review that one
lol
elbaum do you have any idea how the grading rubric was from any of the practice tests in the review packet?
what do you mean
like what score would get you a 3, 4, or 5
from either of the practice tests
well the frq is 50%
oh no it depends on how other eople do
yeah but from the practice tests
lol
is it curved?
http://www.rea.com/ftp/apgovt_pol.pdf
this has the like equation
they use
Do you guys know the court precedents
what do u mean court precedents?
do we have to know all of them from the website?
like major scotus decisions?
yes
no
the website listed above- what is that a website of?
dask8er144 has left this chat.
any other questions?
remember, lars and conneen have a show starting in 10 minutes
8:50 PM
am 560
do u the topic of their discussion
I am excited
i already ahve the browser open
what browser
can you go over the court precedents
me 2 and the guy talking is realy weird
lalapgovernment.blogspot.com
can you go over the court precedents
what is that a website for?
you know the amendments that have been selectively incorporated
hm.
*nm
1458?
1 4 5 8
6
right to a lawyer
so all the trial ones
7th is right to a speedy trial?
incorporated with gideo
n
or is that 8th
cruel and unusual
8th
which is speedy trial?
wait can u list the numbers again
1 4 5 6 8
why wasnt 7
it's about civil trials
powers of bureaucracies....
possible frq
entitlements
we had a quesiton about this in class, the constitution makes the potus the chief diplomat but not the chief of state (according to our definitions of those terms)
right?
right...potus meets with foreign leaders
k
wait by powers of bureaucracies u mean the quasi judicial and quasi legislative?
and makes treaties with the advise and consent of senate
yes
be prepared to give examples
ok
but he cannot make treaties, that has to be approved by congress, right?
FCC, EPA
senate
dont say congress
senate
k
thanks
8:55 PM
which, by the wya, is anothe example of the senate is the upper house
FCC, EPA as examples of what?
bureaucracies
what do we need to know about entitlements
that and that they hold trial for impeachment and that they decide taxes, right?
taxes is house
Ok I'm heading to AM 560...I'll put this transcript on my blog...GOOD LUCK
thank u!

MORE REVIEW

2008-05-04T18:50:00.000-05:00

what's a party caucus and what's the floor of the house? what's the difference between the discussions between them?
party caucus is how candidates USED to be chosen
before the ntl convention method
caucus is LESS democratic because party leaders just got together and chose
instead of delegates
oh ok!
Can any person who meets the formal requirments get on a ballot?
i thought it had something to do with congressional discussions
5:45 PM
getting on the ballot depends on the election
congressional vs. presidential vs. gub vs mayoral
presidential
for the general
yes but the formal requirements are elevated
vs. lesser elections
what elections are funded by public monies?
by public money do they mean taxes? or contributions?
candidates can qualify for federal matching funds in presidential election
taxes
so, on the ballot, will it say if someone is running from a party or independt or does it just say the names of the candidates?
different states different ballots
remember what FL did in 2000 with making the fonts bigger
o right right
that would be a good answer if my predictions turns out (federalism and elections)
and on the topic of federal matching funds, how does it work again, i remember my notes saying sometihng about 5%
(is that prediction just a gut feeling)
not based on anything..I promise!
5:50 PM
ha ok
and so what exactly is funderal funds matching
If your party got 5 percent of the vote in the previous election, your party can get expect certain matching finds from the federal govt
that hurts 3rd parties right?
while, you need to get 5 percent in the previous elections and most 3rd parties don't
ok!
ok 2 follow up questions, 1-at what level wil lthey give funds(basically how much money will the fed. govt give) 2-why would the federal govt give money to political parties
the money comes from voluntary submissions from people when they do their tax return
there is a box they can check
to give 3 dollars
right, now i rmember
but why would the govt do that
the federal govt matches up to a certain amount but then there are more regulations on tha tmoney
could we go over the congress seniority system?
to help underfunded candidates who have a chance
k
and since its from voluntary contributions its ok
ic
seniroity system works like this...
it's about leadership over committees
members in the MAJORITY party with the most years of service on that committee usually become chairperson
5:55 PM
in the review packet they have a different definition of hard. vs. soft money, the way it is explained in the packet, u can give hard money to a political party
ok!
the way i thought it was defined, hard money=to a specific candidate, soft money=to a party
back to matching funds, I believe you have to have raised 100k to qualify
k
hard money used to mean money given that was regulated
and soft money unregulated
oh do we have to know different tupes of debate rules? like closed rule?
that;s why some definations say McCainF banned Soft because all money is regulated
but M-F also changed some of the definitions
Jay, on a different note, did you check out Lal's blog?
i have yea
ok good
y
Just wanted to make sure the Edline E-mail went through
ya it worked
6:00 PM
so for an FRQ can we refer to hard and soft money the way we discussed them in class?
yes
ok koo
do u know what the breakdown of questions is or normally is, like 25% on congressional powers 10% on political parties, etc
The AIM service could not send the message: A message or picture is too large to be transmitted.
I. Constitutional Underpinnings of United States Government / 5-15%
II. Political Beliefs and Behaviors / 10-20%
III. Political Parties, Interest Groups, and Mass Media / 10-20%
IV. Institutions of National Government: The Congress, the Presidency, the Bureaucracy, and the Federal Courts / 35-45%
V. Public Policy / 5-15%
VI. Civil Rights and Civil Liberties / 5-15%
thanks
do we have to know different tupes of debate rules? like closed rule?
open vs. closed rule
yeah
closed=restrict passage of amendments
open=amendments allowed from floor of HOUSE OF REPS
ok
these are determined by the rules committee WHICH IS ONLY IN THE HOUSE
sorry to yell!
senate doesn't have a rules committee
6:05 PM
a good example of how they are a more august chamber governed by tradition
haha, so who deteremines when a clotur will be voted on?
The motion must be proposed, seconded, and be passed and then be put to a vote
so you need to vote in order to vote?
yes
kk
16 senators must sign the petition for cloture i believe
are we going to need to know the details of the scotus cases or more so the precedent of each one?
precedents
not details
k
the details are more for a con law class
you know?!
yea, a ture con law class, haha and then back to the senate and to some degree the house, how are the majority and minority leaders choosen
by the chamber
members
ok
and then pre. pro tem. is determined by senate majority?
6:10 PM
selected by party conferences....pres pro temp is usually given to majority member with most seniority
is that more of a title than actual power?
no the VP is gone a lot so that person steps in as Prez of the Senate
plus they are pretty high up in prez succession
gotchya
1-prez 2- vp- speaker- prez pro temp
so who would be above whom , ppt or senate majority
then sec of state
is it 16 senators or 60 senators?
i always get this confused!
16 for the MOTION
ok!
the review book says 60
senate maj leader is the real leader
60 for the ACTUAL cloture
60 to pass the cloture, 16 to vote for a cloture
16 to propose cloture
k
so just remember 60
y was the house set to 435 seats?
well based on a census they want one member for every 30k people or so
what's a procedural and substantive due process?
ok
i did not understand the definition
so a statue was passed
substantive? Im not sure what you mean
6:15 PM
I just looked it up because I was curious,..435 statue passed in 1929
kool
they just decided it was time to limit the house?
congress wanted a permenant ends to battles over the size
kool
oh no i think i understand! i misread it sorry
will we have to recognize and or refer to articles/sections of the constitution or will they most likely say Article1, section 8, which gives congress its powers does ...
A longshot for one MC question
k
FRQ will be thematic
supremecy, commerce,
gotchya
ahve they ruled on florida and michigan yet?
Nope
But Obama won Guam!
does that ad to his big mo
6:20 PM
I think it;s 4 delegates
haha
ok, the provisions for DC's electors are a little confusing, they can't have more than the lowest state right?
no state gets less than 3
now democrats argue for dc statehood
really?
because dc is very blue
gotchya
and it would probaby give dems 2 senators and 1 congressman
does it have the population requirement?
dems pushed a few years ago for PR statehood
i remember that
dc has 581k residents
and none of those are elected officials of the federal government
alaska ahs 670k
haha
dc is run by the congress
but they do have a mayor
ok
wyoming has 515k
that's crazy
alright, i've got a west wing question
bring it
what was the name of the town in NH where they predicted the turnout of every election
and is that place real
hartfields landing
6:25 PM
is it true that they predicted the outcomes
there are two places like that in NH that vote first
Its based off of a place called Dixville notch
gotchyua
which do vote before the rsr of the state
and ahs a population of 75 people
wow, ap gov question now , well just general gov question, can congressmen send out letters (that they paid for) saying 'vote for me' from their officies, or are those considered federal buildings?
can't say vote for me
Only highlight accomplihsments
even if they don't use franking
also, congresman get free staff but not free campaign staff
o
k
oh, right, then they send letters ot but have to pay for them
so Kirk fires 3 people every year and rehires them as campaign staff and pays them from a seperate account
his warchest
right
question... sorry to disrupt
no keep going
sry sharanya, didn't mean to get off tiopic
how does having no term limit insulate the fed judges from public opinion?
never have to go in front of the people
6:30 PM
no elections
no campaigning, no promises
oooohh
ok
thanks!
I'll be back on later tonight...Dinner time

Transcript from review session

2008-04-28T19:32:00.001-05:00

AIM: Leg Branch Review
7:04 PM
rsharu109 has joined this chat.
7:05 PM
you there?
yeah
what is a bill that has many nongermane ammendments tacked on called?
is it a christmas tree bill?
yes
mlbwhitesox13 has joined this chat.
a xmas tree bill
hey brian
ok
hello
Who has got questions?
and the changes brought about by the committee bill of rights in the early 1970s included the right to have subcomittee jurisdiction determined by?
what number
umm 35
so everyone can follow along
sorry
the majority aprty
ok!
and 36 too
do u want me to type it out>
?*
I don't have my sheet, so could you paraphrase
yes what are the recent trends in congress regarding the # of ammendments to proposed law
i have a question. its number 31, generally, what are the most importatn committees in congress?
they have gone way up
ok
standing committees are most imporant
thanks u!
thank*
those are the regular committees that bills get sent to...remember specialization
7:10 PM
thank you
sure
ooohhh we have to do the other review sheet too?
yea
interest groups?
yes
darn it!
so any other questions
not for now
ok I'll be on for a little
ok
yes, number 33, they type o comitee most liley to deal with a bill near the end of its legislative process is the..
conference committee
the bill that gets send to the POTUS needs to be in identical form between the h and senate
so when htere are differences, a conference committee works on it to make it identical
the committee consists of members of both chambers
mlbwhitesox13 has left this chat.
so what's the difference between a joint committee and conference committee?
mlbwhitesox13 has joined this chat.
conference committee is a kind of joint committee
you mean the house and the senate righgt
right
yeah
cool
Shame about the Sox leaving so many men on base, right Brian?
7:15 PM
indeed, a two hour rain delay to start the game. it goes 11 full innings and gets suspended. Its going to be made up at a later date,
its crazy.
i ahve another question if u wanted to know what a member of congress voted on a particular bill, you would look at how he/she voted on what? #58
on the amendments of the bill
because voting against the amendments is a good way to kill a bill
oh ok!
thnks!
when you say ammendments, you mean the various parts of a bill?
7:20 PM
right
i thought an ammendment was a change to the bill
do they split up the bill while voting?
mlbwhitesox13 has left this chat.
no they vote on the entire thing
mlbwhitesox13 has joined this chat.
i have a question on number 53, it states, unlike the house, the scheduling off legislation in the senate is whose responsibility?
an amendment could be a part of the original bill, OR someone may "propose an amendment" which would be a change to the bill
ok
53: majority and minority leaders
Thank you.
I will be right back in a few minutes.
7:25 PM
mlbwhitesox13 has left this chat.
mlbwhitesox13 has joined this chat.
7:30 PM
I guess there's nothing else, any last questions before I leave?
nope
Ok. Maybe I'll be back on later...See you tomorrow

AP Govt. Review

2008-03-13T11:49:00.001-05:00

Debate Time

2008-02-26T19:18:00.001-06:00

Last debate before Texas and Ohio! Big Night for HRC. Let's Blog

Transcript from study session

2008-02-24T19:59:00.000-06:00

hello?
hey elbaum its kyle
sadly
crazzy4u192 has joined this chat.
welcome
thanks
hi
no oscars for you tonight?
not for me
this is the real red carpet party....what kind of questions do you guys have
no haha
haha ok
FRQ related
ok bring it
7:05 PM
for liberals vs conservatives what exacly do we need to know
what kind of person is liberal or conservative and why
question could be define each
so liek jews
then describe three factors that make up someone's political ideology
becasue
a liberal is in favor of big government and want gov in the economy but favor political freedom over economical freedom?
are you asking me or are you about to tell me?
askign idk why jews are liberal
liberal=economic control with social freedom
oh so sicne they have liek been discrimnated in the past they want social freedom now
dask8er144 has joined this chat.
right
yup
dask8er144 has left this chat.
jews tend to be socially liberal because of their past
what is political ideology again?
and then women cuzz they are in favor of pro chioice
what u belive the govt should do?
hoff1425 has joined this chat.
political ideology is one's philisophy about how govt should act
ok so i got a question on #31 on the RS the part states "What portion of the electorate can NOT vote? Why?" can u help me out here?
so if that was the frq it would go something like this
ok im listening
a) define political ideology
b) explain the difference between lib and cons
what demographic tends to vote
7:10 PM
c) explain three demogaphic factors that contribute to one's political ideology
or something to that effect
for c could u say family
sportzguy53 has joined this chat.
family is not a demographic
religion, gender, race, etc
then would u haev to explain why for each demographic
ok can i throw a RS question at you?
yes
bring it
ok so i got a question on #31 on the RS the part states "What portion of the electorate can NOT vote? Why?" can u help me out here?
im not an ass
hang on gotta invite someone else
ok sorry wrong IM
elbaum what demographic votes the most and what votes the least
the most would be 65+ and least would be 18-25
anyone find that percentage wuesiton
what percentage cannot vote
?
couldnt find it
no i couldnt find that one
demographic that votes the most=elderly...least=18-24
20% on average
is 20% the answer for 31
thanks el
yes
why can't they vote
7:15 PM
not citizens, dont register, felons
k thanks
i couldn't find 36
about the bowling alone
i dont have the study guide in front me me
what's the question
k the questions how does "bowling alone" affect social capital? Why is social capital necessary in a democracy?
whats the moter voter
bowling alone is a reference to how people still go bowling, but nobody is in a bowling league
hoff let the man answer one qeustion at a time
so what it says about social capital is that it has gone down...
shut it dsilv
in other words, parties and people need to appeal to specific people instead of groups
ooo k got it thanks
does that make sense?
rsharu109 has joined this chat.
ya i get it
anyone find what motor voter mean?
yes
i did
ya its when they allowed people to register when they were getting their license
when u register to vote when u get your driver's license
what's a silent majority?
the people who aren't active in politics
ok thanks!
yes
silent majority..any help from the crowd?
elbaum what was the motor voter
what the electorate?
7:20 PM
i just said what that was hoffman
silent majority is a reference to how, sometimes, the majority of americans aren't vocal about their ideology, but express their views at the polls
so it may look like hte majority of americans are for gay marriage, but in reality, gay marriage referendums always fail
Oh i get it!
sorry!!
does that make sense?
k elbaum i got another
and for #13 i know we discussed it in class but i could not find it in the text book... why are professors more liberal?
mlbwhitesox13 has joined this chat.
yes it does
Blacks participate more than whites of the same socioeconomic status. Why is htat the case and how was that statistic determined?
what the electorate?
Why are asians and males more conservative?
prof's are more liberal because they are usually well traveled and study different groups of people..that makes them more sympathetic to other people's issues
sometimes
how does bowling alone affect social capital Why is social captiatl necessary in a democracy?
the electorate is voting age americans
flipstergal120 has joined this chat.
thanks
asians tend to be conservative for 2 reasons
1. cultural reasons
2. higher socio economic levels
7:25 PM
Blacks participate more than whites of the same socioeconomic status. Why is htat the case and how was that statistic determined?
hang on gotta invite more people who Imed me. If you know the answer help each other out
why are males more conservatives?
cuz theyre not as sympathetic as women
males are more conservative b/c of they're stadn on gun controls, military spending etc
They are also more conservative because they have been favored in the past. Women are less conservative because they support social and economic change. They have had to fight for their right for equal wages, right to vote etc...
thaanks
Blacks participate more than white of the same socio economic because, statistically, they have stronger opinions on the role of government in economic matters
mlbwhitesox13 has left this chat.
that statistic is known for 2 reasons
1. exit polls
7:30 PM
2. regular polling
mlbwhitesox13 has joined this chat.
does that make sense?
yaa thanks
did anyone get 40
what's 40
X0BayBee GrL0x has joined this chat.
heyy
Two multinational studies of voter turnout concluded that party strength, automatic registration, and compulsory voting laws accounted for how much fo the variance of turnout?
anyone find that one
nope
Two careful studies of all these factors found that almost all of the differences in turnout
among twenty-four democratic nations, including the US, could be explained by partly strength, automatic registration, and compulsory voting laws.
yes
thanks
any questions regarding frqs
should i ask you guys questions
yea
sure
go
ok
i have a question, which demographic groups vote the most and the least?
most old people least 18-24
65+ most 18-25 least
1. should the honeymoon start at gettysburg or vicksburg
CANCUN
The most powerful determinant of political participation, other than education and information, is
puerto vallerta
family?
7:35 PM
no
age
age?
darn
According to studies, what effect does cynicism have on voter turnout
oh i was almost faster than u, mr elbaum!
nothing
it has no effect
people still vote no mater what
yea
nothing
whats the average turnout for prez election
mlbwhitesox13 has left this chat.
38-40 %
What is one reason that the results of last-minute polls differ from the actual results of an election?
50-60
no
X0BayBee GrL0x has left this chat.
mlbwhitesox13 has joined this chat.
boom said 38-40?
book
varies..last election was 53
on the test, one choice will be less than 60
another less than 40
what portion of the electorate can not vote
20%
so we wouild put less than 60%
what does VEP stand for
or VAP
voting age population?
yes
vep?
voting eligable population
right
What is one reason that the results of last-minute polls differ from the actual results of an election?
cuzz people change thier minds
7:40 PM
another reason is a lack of responses in a pre election poll
right..the kind of person who changes their mind so late is the kind of person who may change it again...
yes
thanks
could it also be that the sample is not represented well?
elbaum ask us more questions
The text suggests that one reason religious involvement increases political participation is because
church involvement leads to social connectedness, teaches organizational skills, increases one’s awareness of larger issues, and puts one in contact with like-minded people.
yes
something about being part of a community and stronger moral views
what group in the democcratic party is consistently the most liberal?
gays
voters in the south have become less connected to which party
thank you
democratic party
democratic
yes
did we get what the motor voter law was
someone asked a while ago
why are southerners more conservatives now
7:45 PM
yea iliek twice
southerners have always been more conservative
yes, it is a law that the state must ask a person if they want to register to vote while they are getting their drivers licesne
license
yes
whya re they in general
1. more rural
more conservative
2. more religious
3. less diverse
theyre traditional
make sense
?
yep
thanks
Over the years which political party ahs the gender gap benefited?
has*
what number is that
10
anyone find that one
repubs
i think it said the republican party, and that males are more likely to vote for a republican
why
ok thats what i thought is it b/c the men became republican?
yes when the republican party took a hard line on foreign policy
ok thank you!
elbaum ask some questions that will help for the frq
anything else?
bring it
stuff for the FRQ
ed2damund has joined this chat.
what you got
7:50 PM
mlbwhitesox13 has left this chat.
heyyy
heyyyy
mlbwhitesox13 has joined this chat.
anyone?
whgat do we need to knwo for the canot vs do not voters
for the fRq
cannot: 1. convicted felons
2. young peopple
3. people who dont register
4. no penalty for not voting
5. election day only one day
demographic factors
1. age
2. race
3. renters/owners
4. education
income
question why are the cannot voters "no penaltiy for not voting
hello?
shouldnt thta be liek do not?
because it's an institutional obstacle
what does that mean
means that it's part of state or federal law
so you don't have to vote
race is factor strictly for do not. Couldnt race also be a reason why people do vote.
so not everyone does
yes, but the question would be about democraphic factors or do not
so you'd say race
and then explain
so wouldnt that be since u dont have to vote u dont, therefore do not voters
7:55 PM
no because it's got something to do with govt. policy
okay gochya
and then question would be geared towards that
in case anyone needs the info: do not: 1. don't want to vote 2. aged 18-26 (low turnout...flaky) 3. race (e.g. blacks vote less)
4. education (if you learn what politics are about you're more likely to vote) 5. renters vs. owners (renters are flaky and owners pay taxes so are invested in what's going on in their area)
thanks
oh and religion
church goers more like to vote
rawr you didn't say that
why
it's a part of the study guide
because they are part of a community.
yes
they want to vote for people who will support their values
mlbwhitesox13 has left this chat.
mlbwhitesox13 has joined this chat.
alright folks. See you tomorrow. Stay and ask each other questions if you'd like

Primary Election 2008

2008-02-05T19:29:00.001-06:00

MR. ELBAUM'S POWER IS OUT. HOWEVER FEEL FREE TO LEAVE COMMENTS AS THE RESULTS COME IN.

2008-02-05T19:29:00.000-06:00

2008-02-03T10:36:00.000-06:00

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”

- First amendment to the US Constitution

Our constitution, unlike many others, is remarkably vague. While the first amendment protects speech, it left the definition of what speech is to the Courts.

Do citizens have the right to protest by writing letters urging people to resist the draft?

No, as the court ruled in Shenk v. US

Do citizens have the right to symbolic speech

Yes, as the Court ruled in Texas v. Johnson (it is legal to burn a US Flag)

Is obscene speech protected speech?

No, as the court ruled in Roth v. US.

So what, exactly, is obscene speech?

In 1973, the Court, although ambiguous as usual, answered that question. They devised a three-pronged test that judged whether speech/expression could be censored by the state. The “Miller Test” is as follows:

In order for a work to be legitimately subject to state regulation:

· the average person, applying contemporary community standards (not national standards, as some prior tests required), must find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
· the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions specifically defined by applicable state law and
· the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

As most high school students know, Abercrombie & Fitch has earned a reputation for its risqué catalogues and promotional photography featuring scantily clothed models. A Virginia Beach A & F has recently been cited by police for violating an obscenity law for displaying a picture of three shirtless young men walking through a field.
Take a look at the picture. Does it pass the Miller Test? Should the court do more, less, or nothing at all to protect “obscene” speech or expression?

"He shall, from time to time"

2008-01-28T16:23:00.000-06:00

"He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient."

Article II, section 3 of the constitution.

Click "comments" below to share your thoughts on the SOTU.

The Big Mo!

2008-01-27T09:12:00.000-06:00

Primaries are all about momentum.

A candidate needs a majority of delegates to win their parties nomination. Delegates are awarded based on the percentage of the state that a candidate won. For example, Senator Obama won convincingly in South Carolina with 55% of the vote. Hillary Clinton came in second place with 27%. The victory earned Obama twenty-five delegates, and Senator Clinton earned twelve. A candidate needs 2025 to win. When you break down the numbers, it doesn’t sound quite so convincing.

However, the blowout in South Carolina gives Obama a tremendous amount of momentum. The state was chosen for an early primary because of its large African American population. Obama was able to win a majority of the state’s minority population, but also did much better than expected with women and white voters.

go to this site for the exit polls. It will surprise you!

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#SCDEM

The momentum has earned Obama some key endorsements, most notable the daughter of perhaps the most famous and beloved Democratic president of all time. Caroline Kennedy, daughter of John F. Kennedy wrote an op-ed in Sunday's New York Times published on the paper's Web site Saturday night, titled "A President Like My Father". Kennedy writes: "It isn't that the other candidates are not experienced or knowledgeable. But this year, that may not be enough. We need a change in the leadership of this country — just as we did in 1960….”

Does Obama remind you of JFK?

Some much needed momentum heading into Super Tuesday, which is coming up February 5th. On that date, millions of Americans (including Stevenson voters) will head to the polls. The question is, will they vote for their favorite candidate, or will the momentum sweep them up?

Federal or State matter?

2008-01-22T14:56:00.001-06:00

As we talked about in class, the Supreme Court is examining the standard for judging whether chemicals used to administer lethal injections make that method of execution unconstitutionally cruel.
The Court will issue their opinion in the coming months.

The Supreme Court also agreed to decide whether the Constitution allows the death penalty for the rape of a child.

These will be the first death penalty cases the court has taken in decades.

Should the Supreme Court, a federal institution, tell individual states what to do regarding the death penalty? Should people be executed for raping a child?

Obama and Huckabee win Iowa

2008-01-05T00:00:00.000-06:00

Patriot of 76 was there the action. Check out the picture from the Des Moines Register. Can you find me?

Any thoughts on Iowa, BO, Huck, Hil, or the election in general?

US History Review

2007-12-24T12:18:00.000-06:00

"Peace, plenty, and contentment reign throughout our borders, and our
beloved country presents a sublime moral spectacle to the world..."
-James K. Polk

Click here for Questions 1-10

Click here for Questions 11-20

Click here for Questions 21-30

Click here for questions 31-40

Click here for Questions 50-59

Click here for Questions 71-80

Click here for Questions 81-90.mp3

Click here for questions 90-93

Flip Flopper or Decision changer?

2007-12-06T11:54:00.000-06:00

transcript from review session

2007-11-29T20:25:00.000-06:00

You have just entered room "apgovtreview."

XXXXXXXXX: hi mr. elbaum
jkp4evaeva: hang on a second

jkp4evaeva: ok, what kind of questions do you have
XXXXXXXXXX has entered the room.
XXXXXXXXX: hey elbaum!
XXXXXXXXX: ok..the question is... the numerical superiority of house reprisentatives over senators carries with it the implication that?
XXXX: what #
XXXXX: well, i'll start. #5 from chapter 13. overriding political question throughout evolution of conress
XXXXXXXXXX: 25
jkp4evaeva: Numerical advantage means leadership has more power
jkp4evaeva: overiding question=what will the distribution of power be
jkp4evaeva: between House and Senate
XXXX: thanks!
XXXX: next one, number 15...
XXXXX: thank you!
XXXXX: changes in composition of congress members
jkp4evaeva: more idealogical/more partisan
jkp4evaeva: members while the general public has remained more moderate
XXXX: great! thanks! i remember now that we talked about that one in class
jkp4evaeva: yep, Congress was supposed to embody the will of the people
XXXX: what is the life expectancy of a bill- was that asking for years or for the step in the law-making process
jkp4evaeva: 2 Years to pass or it dies
XXXXX: what is the cloture rule?
jkp4evaeva: one congress
jkp4evaeva: no, cloture is a tad different
jkp4evaeva: cloture ends a filibuster
jkp4evaeva: 60/100 are needed
jkp4evaeva: for cloture
XXXXXX: oh okay, cause number 57 asked about the current cloture rule
jkp4evaeva: A bill has two years to pass (signed by Prez or veto overridden)
jkp4evaeva: 3/5's vote, or 60 senators
XXXXXX: so 2 year life expectancy. thanks!
jkp4evaeva: sure
XXXXX: okay ...thank you!
XXXXXXX: okay those are all my questions mr. elbaum.
XXXXXX: thank you so much!!!
XXXXX: also, #58, which is too long to type in. lol (that's laugh out loud, right elbaum?)
jkp4evaeva: =-O---that's all??
jkp4evaeva: look how they voted on amendments
LovinUAlwayz23: yeah..hehe i finished my review packet yesterday
jkp4evaeva: sometimes, those are the most important parts
CoolJul8: the floor amendments?
jkp4evaeva: of a bill
jkp4evaeva: amendments to a bill, yes they could be put on on the floor
XXXXXX: wait...one more question..number 64
XXXXXX: lol
XXXXXXX: ok. thanks. i figured out all the amendment stuff last night with leg. lingo
jkp4evaeva: in a decentralized system, there is federalism (power of state and national govt)
jkp4evaeva: therefore, there are more people to corrupt
jkp4evaeva: in a decentralized system
XXXXXXX: oohh okay
jkp4evaeva: does that make sense?
XXXXXX: gotcha
XXXXXX: yeah
XXXXXXX: thanks mr. elbaum!
XXXXXX: more opp. for corruption b/c more ppl involved
jkp4evaeva: happy to help
jkp4evaeva: yes
XXXXX: ok. gotcha. that makes sense
XXXXXXX: ill be on later to ask more questions!
jkp4evaeva: ok, I'll be here for a while
XXXXXX: elbaum, do u mind if i still ask u a few questions?
XXXXXX: okay thanks!@
jkp4evaeva: shoot
XXXXXXX has left the room.
XXXXXX: #7, from IG/chapter 11
XX n XXX XXXX has entered the room.
jkp4evaeva: keep crisis in the spotlight
jkp4evaeva: they count on the media to keep the crisis in the spotlight
XXX n XX XXX: i have a question on number 40
XXXX: oh, that makes sense- to be effective ppl have to hear about them
XXXXX has entered the room.
jkp4evaeva: yea..all about information
XXXX: k. thanks
jkp4evaeva: can the new people see the text that happened before you came in?
XXXXX: nope
XX n XXX XXXX: no
XXXXX: r u posting it on the blog later? b/c they could c it then
jkp4evaeva: ok fire away new people
XXXXX has entered the room.
jkp4evaeva: i'll put the entire transcript on the blog when i'm done
XXXX: thanks!
XXXXX: sounds good
XXXX: ok question... the changes brought about by the committee bill of rights in the early 1970s included the right to have subcommitte jurisdiction determined by...?
XXXXX: i think i'm all questioned out for right now, but i might stick around to c other questions and check my answers
jkp4evaeva: what #
jkp4evaeva: so everyone can ply along at home
XXXXXX: 35
jkp4evaeva: they were brought on by the majority party
jkp4evaeva: i mean determined by the majority party
XXXXX: ok that makes sense thank you
jkp4evaeva: that makes being in the majority even more important
XXXXXXX: I had a question about # 36...Describe the recent trends in COngressregarding the number of amendments to proposed laws
CoolJul8: general question. when u r no longer in the majority, if u r a committee chairman do u just one day lose your job?
jkp4evaeva: they have increased, gone way up becca
jkp4evaeva: yes you give it up
jkp4evaeva: committees are chaired only by majority party
XXXXX
XXXXX: that kinda sucks. one day u just have to leave. govn't is harsh
XXXXX: lol
jkp4evaeva: laugh out loud
XXXXX: lol
XXXXXX: haha
jkp4evaeva: you guys know what Ways and Means does?
jkp4evaeva: the committee
XXXX: a lot
XXXXX: raise taxes bills go there
jkp4evaeva: yes...one of the most powerful committees in the house
XXXXXX: is there an equivalent in the senate?
XXXXXX: th senate Finacne committee?
XXXXXX: finance*
jkp4evaeva: not by name. but yes, Finance
XXXXXX: another general question. does the joint committee iron out the differences in bills b4 they go to the chambers or after they go and r voted on once?
XXXXXX: after right?
jkp4evaeva: yea
XXXXXXX: I have a question on #42 What generalization can be given regarding the speed with which bills move through congress?
XXXXX: slow
jkp4evaeva: it varies widely
jkp4evaeva: some bills are on the fast track
XXXXX: oops hahaha
XXXXX: so they vote once, iron out differences, and vote again
jkp4evaeva: like the PATRIOT act after 9.11
jkp4evaeva: most of the time
XXXXXX: ok... thanks
XXXXX: question on 38.. Explain the effects of the growth in congressional staff
XXXXX: more reliance on them?
jkp4evaeva: it's meant more legislative work...yes basically more reliance
jkp4evaeva: members of congress have more expected out of them
jkp4evaeva: remember, congressman get 100k's of dollars for staff
XXXXX: right
jkp4evaeva: that's a new thing
XXXXX: so because they have help now they have more expected out of them?
jkp4evaeva: yes
XXXXX: got it
XXX n ThE XXXX: if you are a commitee staf member and want to know the status of a bill where can you get th einfo form most quicly?
XXXXX: Is the life expectancy of a bill 2 yrs?
jkp4evaeva: one of the reasons why being a congressman is now a fulltime job
jkp4evaeva: what #
XX n ThE XXX: 40
XXXX: 45
jkp4evaeva: Congressional REsearch office
XXX n XXXX XXXX: ok
jkp4evaeva: Life of a bill=2 years (one house)
XXXXX: ok cool
jkp4evaeva: when a "new house" comes in,bill must start over
jkp4evaeva: because there a many new members
XXXXX: what do you mean by new house
XXXXXX: start over in committe or in terms of voting
jkp4evaeva: re-introduced
jkp4evaeva: start from step #1
XXXXX: oh ok
jkp4evaeva: because sometimes there's a new speaker
jkp4evaeva: like pelosi took over for Dennis Hastert, a republican
XXXX: so then all the bills had to be reintrocued?
XXXXX: reintroduced**
XXXXXX: yikes. thats a bit monotonous. that would explain the 2 year lifespan though
XXXXXXX 90 has entered the room.
jkp4evaeva: That's why bills dont get introduced at the end of a sesion
jkp4evaeva: what's up shizzle
XXXXXX: what about #53 Unlike the house, the scheduling of legislation in the senate is whose responsibility?
XXXXXX 90: hi yea i just had questions on 63 and64 of the ch 13 review
XX: majoirty leader?
jkp4evaeva: yes, and minority leader
XXXXXX: both?
jkp4evaeva: they work together
XXXXX: k
jkp4evaeva: with final say going to maj leader
jkp4evaeva: shizzle, 63 is reffering to the franking priv
jkp4evaeva: remember what that is
XXXXX 90: yea congressmen get free postage
XXX n ThE XXXX: increased reliance on staff has made congress more? #39
jkp4evaeva: 4 shizzle
izzle4shizzle 90: hah thanks
jkp4evaeva: made them more individualistic
jkp4evaeva: they dont work with others as much
jkp4evaeva: just their staff
XXX n ThE XXXXX: thx
jkp4evaeva: they dont need other members of congress anymore
jkp4evaeva: or as much
XXXX: I had a question on 64 also?
XXXX has entered the room.
XXXX 90: yea the text book is vague on 64
jkp4evaeva: hisham, welcome to the party
XXXXXX: thanks
jkp4evaeva: someone help shizzle on 64
XXXX: elbaum how do you know who everyone is
XXXXXX 90: yes please
XXXXXX has left the room.
jkp4evaeva: decentralized is reffering to federalism
jkp4evaeva: state and federal power
jkp4evaeva: therefore, there are more officals to effect policy
jkp4evaeva: and therefore, more corruption is possible
XXXXX: so more corruption is possible in a system liek ours?
XXXXXX 90: ok so basically there are more areas for corruptoin to occur?
XXXXXX: elbaum the podcast is key to my success
XXXXX has entered the room.
XXXXXXX: im nothing without it

XXXXX: stupid wireless internet threw me off. sorry, it tends to do that! lol
jkp4evaeva: yes shizzle
jkp4evaeva: local, state, federal officials
jkp4evaeva: more people=more chance of corruption
XXXXXXX 90: makes sense
jkp4evaeva: talking about #64
XXXXX: what does myrtle think about this
XXXXX: ok i have a question on interest group study guide
jkp4evaeva: i think hisham just came to talk and not for any questions
XXXX: #20... sometimes money affects legislative behavior not so much by buying votes as by ensuring whwat else?
XXXXX: lol
XXXX: agreed.
XXXXXX: lol haha yeah i got the football game on, im not ready to study
XXXX: hisham dont tell peopel that
jkp4evaeva: access
XXXXXX: to...
jkp4evaeva: interest group's just want a meeting with power
jkp4evaeva: either congressman or even POTUS
XXXXXXX: #3 on the Interest groups Questions... List a type of interest group whose representation in Washington has skyrocketed since 1970
jkp4evaeva: money doesnt buy votes, it buys acces
XXXXXXXX 90: well i'm all about studyin right now... so how bout number 13 interest groups
jkp4evaeva: public interest becca
XXXXX: thanks
jkp4evaeva: what's the question shizzle
XXXXXX: #14 on IG- answer is develop and maintain confidence of legislator over long period of time??
XXXXXX 90: the value of info, the power of lobbyists, and thus the success of ig's are greatest when what is ture
XXXXXX 90: true
jkp4evaeva: when the issue is very narrow...usually then it's more complex and out of the reach of most people except for specialists like interest groups
jkp4evaeva: shizzle..make sense?
XXXXXX 90: oh yea that was on teh quiz
X: narrow
X: wait for #14 is it because they need to maintain trust
X: and confidence
jkp4evaeva: yes
jkp4evaeva: yes
jkp4evaeva: reputation is everything in washington
X: k. just double checking
jkp4evaeva: if you have a rep of giving bad info you're worthless
XXXX: #8 The policies of public-interest organizations are predominantly shaped by...?
X: goals of nonmenbers?
jkp4evaeva: elites, or as bayle would say....
X: LOL
X: (laugh out loud)
jkp4evaeva: thanks for the explanation
X: on congress review questions number 10? the most important change that has occured in the composition of the House..?
X: would nonmeber's goals work too?
X: nm
XXXX has left the room.
XX 90: i think number ten is the number of first-term members in the house
X: i thought that it was because it became increasingly more African American?
X has entered the room.
X: i thought it was first termers too, but on the quiz that wasnt one of the answers
X: yes...HiInN they're looking for a change in incubency
XXXXX: i have shift in minorit influence due to differing majorities
X 90: yea i notices that too
X: HIIII ITS SHANAYNAY
X: #9 Who in America is most likely to join interest groups?
X 90: yo elbaum .. can u help us on that one
jkp4evaeva: above average voters
X: ppl from upper class
X: which one. Im sorry
X: i was inviting sha nay nay in
X: hi k question.....# 13:define a marginal district
jkp4evaeva: marginal is when someone wins, but barely---usually with less than 55% of the vote
X 90: its all good... but what is the most important change that has happened in the composition of the house?
X: apparently that is change in incumbency?
jkp4evaeva: there has been a slight change in incumency rates
X 90: right..doesnt that refer to the # of first-termers
jkp4evaeva: a major decrease in turnover
X: ok, I'm heading out... thanks Elbaum... bye everyone!
X 90: so more new members?
jkp4evaeva: no, less new members
X has left the room.
X 90: ahh
jkp4evaeva: decrease in turnover
jkp4evaeva: like we talked about in the FRQ
jkp4evaeva: because of gerrymandering, pork, etc
X: The most important change that has occurred in the composition of the House in this century is that it there has been a decrease in turnover?
X: does that make sense
X: ok, elbaum i g2g study for this and another test, but i'll check the blog tonight to c what i missed and come back with anymore questions i have. thanks so much for all your help! we should make this a tradition for every test...
X 90: oh wait... i read the book wrong... its more difficult for new members to join
X: thanks again! c u tomorrow!!!!
X has entered the room.
jkp4evaeva: JZ in the house
X: #58: if you wanted to know what memebr of congress really though about a bill, you would be best advised to look at how he or she voted on what?
X has left the room.
jkp4evaeva: how they voted on amendments
X n ThE X: when a bill passes the house and senate in substantially diffrent forms the diffrences are resolved where? #60
BabbYBunnY05: thank:-)
X: conference
jkp4evaeva: yana, that would show whether they wanted the bill to pass or not
jkp4evaeva: Catie, what qtl a-z entertainment said
X n X X: huh?
X: LOL again
X: #5. what has been the overriding political question throughout the evolution of congress?
jkp4evaeva: conference committee is a joint commitee that irons out the differences so the bill passes in IDENTICAL form to the president
jkp4evaeva: make sense?
X: by the wya.. glim really thinks a-z is coming
jkp4evaeva: overiding question- what should the distribution of power be between house and senate
jkp4evaeva: also, what exactly does the elastic clause and.or commerce clause mean
X: house leadership has more control...?
X: bc more representatives?
jkp4evaeva: yes, therefore more control
X 90: wait but aren't they supposed to be = b/c of checks and balances
X: elbaum im bout to fail this test i hope u know
X: elbaum im bout to fail this test i hope u know
jkp4evaeva: they can check each other but the senate is still the "upper house"
jkp4evaeva: you'll do fine..the NEXT test is the hard one
X: y
X: ?
X: why what is the next test
X 90: right... but you just said yes to a question asking if the house had more control...
jkp4evaeva: house LEADERSHIP has more control
X 90: oh ok.. sorry for being difficult
jkp4evaeva: speaker more powerful than president pro tempore
X 90: haha
jkp4evaeva: you're not difficult
jkp4evaeva: :-)
X: can you explain the commerce/elastic thing
X 90: ok so, the house leadership has more control, but the senate is still the upper house, but the leader of the house has more power than the leader of the senate?
jkp4evaeva: sure...the commerce clause and elastic clause give congress unspecified power
jkp4evaeva: both clauses are vague
jkp4evaeva: they could mean nothing or everything
jkp4evaeva: commerce: power to regulate interstate commerce
X: ok got it
X: and where are they again
jkp4evaeva: constitution
X: well obviously
jkp4evaeva: yes to your last question izzle
X: which part again haha
izzle4shizzle 90: ight thank you sir
jkp4evaeva: article i ellis
X: thanks
jkp4evaeva: section 8
jkp4evaeva: clause 18
QtLS11: haha so specific thanks!
X: wait whats the role of the interest groups, 1. concept of federalism, weakening of political parties???? that
jkp4evaeva: commerce is clause 3
X: wuts the 3rd one?
jkp4evaeva: of section 8
jkp4evaeva: wait,you're asking why they're powerful yana?
jkp4evaeva: 3. 1st amendment
X: no like what's the point of having them?
jkp4evaeva: so private citizens can advocate for a specific issue that they feel is important
jkp4evaeva: like MADD (mothers against drunk drivers) fighting for tougher DUI laws
X: ok then so what do they do?
X: they lobby for laws to prevent drunk driving
jkp4evaeva: try to convince (lobby) congressman/leaders to be on their side and pass laws
X: 17.According to scholarly evidence, does PAC money buy votes in congress
jkp4evaeva: sketchy, at best
jkp4evaeva: PAC money is OVERATED
jkp4evaeva: as far as buying votes
jkp4evaeva: it buys access
X: for the frq u said u gave us 3 things for the role of interest groups, i don't get it
jkp4evaeva: money gets you meetings
X 90: okk
X 90: thanks
jkp4evaeva: possible FRQ's....1:incumbency 2: House v. senate 3. Why interest groups are powerful 4. divided govt 5. what interest groups do
jkp4evaeva: #5 is that activity you did with partners
X: yea that!!!
izzle4shizzle 90: hey we didnt get an activty
Bballjet34: huh?
Bballjet34: what activity?
QtLS11: with the 26 things?
jkp4evaeva: that sheet in your packet where you put a #1 or #2 next to each tactic
jkp4evaeva: that's as close to an in class activity as I get
izzle4shizzle 90: ohhhh i would call that..a worksheet
X: ok thx Mr.E cya 2morrow
jkp4evaeva: fair enough
jkp4evaeva: by Catie
.
X: whats 3 on the interest groups. list a type of interest group whose rep in Wahsington has skyroketed since 1970
X: institutional
X 90: isnt that public interest?
jkp4evaeva: public interest group
jkp4evaeva: you guys got anything else?
X 90: i think i'm all set thanks elbaum
jkp4evaeva: ok good
X: me too
X: thanks elbs see you tomorrow
X 90: see you in the morning
jkp4evaeva: see you later
X: um 23 oThe federal regulation of lobbying act of 1946 required groups and ind seeking to infleuence
QtLS11: ps i'm coming to glim's party
X: legistlation on what
jkp4evaeva: hang on just got another request
X has entered the room.
jkp4evaeva: register with the federal government and file quarterly reports
jkp4evaeva: JZ, make sense?
X: not quite
jkp4evaeva: that's if you're a PAC, which is if a group has over 1000 dollars in assets
X: i dont understand wut a discharge petition is
jkp4evaeva: interest groups have to register, and tell the govt what they are spending their money on
jkp4evaeva: to make sure there is no bribery going on or anything
X: it like stalls the bill
X: k
jkp4evaeva: jz, does that make sense?
jkp4evaeva: discharge petition gets a bill out of committee
jkp4evaeva: sometimes a committee chairman will let a bill sit in committee and try to stall...if enough congressman/senators want, they can force it out of committee
X: onto the floor?
jkp4evaeva: yes
jkp4evaeva: for debate and maybe to get passed
jkp4evaeva: does that makes sense?
X: yep thank you
jkp4evaeva: I'm not sure who HiInNa is
X: grace.. haha sry
jkp4evaeva: oh hey grace!
X: :]
X: hi
X 90 has entered the room.
jkp4evaeva: i knew you'd be back izzle
X 90: ? 8.The policies of public interest organizations are predominantly shaped by _______
X 90: sorry i just couldnt get enough gov in my life
jkp4evaeva: elites
X: saw that
X: :-)
HiInNa123: To be effective, purposive membership organizations count on what?
jkp4evaeva: what # so everyone can see
X: allowing bills to be debated on open instead of restrictive rules
X: #7 on interest groups
X: why is that
jkp4evaeva: keeping crisis in the spotlight
jkp4evaeva: more atttention=more chance of success
jkp4evaeva: hisham what q
X: idk it was on the qyuz
X: quiz*
X has left the room.
X: it was like for what reason are bulls alowed on open restrictiver rules instwead of closed ones
X 90: oh i wrote that ? from the quiz down .. the answer was "gives greater control to committees"
X: bills*
jkp4evaeva: yep
jkp4evaeva: committees have more power to have influence on the bill
jkp4evaeva: in open rather than closed
X: mmk
jkp4evaeva: dont know that one
jkp4evaeva: mmk
X 90: oh and what is the ways & means committee exactly
X: mmk is like oh k
X: jeez elabum
X: did they not have aim in college
jkp4evaeva: ways and means committee is where tax bills start in the house
jkp4evaeva: one of the most powerful in house
X 90: yea thats what i htought
X 90: but something on the quiz was like "particular party and

You (tube) and I discussing Politics

2007-11-27T12:47:00.001-06:00

Democratic Debate

2007-11-15T11:56:00.001-06:00

What do you think? Who sounds good? Who is out of their mind? Who gets your vote?

Presidency and Media Podcast

2007-11-06T12:35:00.000-06:00

“All the president is, is a glorified public relations man who spends his time flattering, kissing, and kicking people to get them to do what they are supposed to do anyway.”
-Harry S. Truman

Click here for Podcast

PO '76- Halloween edition

2007-10-30T10:32:00.000-05:00

Childhood obesity has become a phenomenon, rapidly rising throughout the world. The obesity epidemic is especially evident in industrialized nations where many people live sedentary lives and eat more convenience foods, which are typically high in calories and low in nutritional value.

According to the Mayo Clinic, in just two decades, the prevalence of overweight doubled for U.S. children ages 6 to 11 — and tripled for American teenagers. The annual National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that about one-third of U.S. children are overweight or at risk of becoming overweight. In total, about 25 million U.S. children and adolescents are overweight or nearly overweight.

Since the number one killer of all Americans in heart conditions, there is a national interest in insuring that children eat healthier.

The fight has begun at our nation’s schools.

ES-M has become the first district in Central New York to prohibit outright sweet desserts in classroom celebrations. Chances are pretty good others in the region will follow, school nutrition experts say.

Across our region, school districts are examining what they sell in vending machines, concession stands and fundraisers and what is served during classroom parties. Many discourage sugary sweets but don't ban them.

Is it the job of the government to make sure kids are eating healthy foods? Is the government regulating our diet too slippery of a slope?

Happy Halloween!

Natural Born or Naturally discriminative

2007-10-24T09:13:00.001-05:00

“ No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

In 1787, John Jay (pictured) wrote a letter to George Washington, who was presiding over the constitutional convention. In it, he said, "permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."

The President must have been born here.

No Foreigners allowed.

Is it time to amend?

Political Parties and Elections Podcast

2007-10-18T11:33:00.000-05:00

"We campaign in poetry but we govern in prose"
- Richard Nixon

Click here for the podcast

Establishment clause vs. SNN

2007-10-12T09:38:00.001-05:00

Did Stevenson students notice anything different about the announcements on the morning of October 12?

On Thursday, Illinois state lawmakers voted to require public schools to provide students with a brief silence at the start of classes. The period would be for “silent prayer or for silent reflection on the anticipated activities for the day”

Governor Rod Blagojevich vetoed the bill, but it was overridden.

Is this an establishment clause violation?

DREAM come true?

2007-10-08T20:19:00.000-05:00

In the election of 2004, it has been said that "moral values voters" reelected the President. The Bush team was able to rally the conservative right, putting an unprecedented emphasis on issues such as same sex marriage, abortion, and stem cell research (They also national security to their advantage). What issues will define the election of 2008?

Unquestionably, immigration will be on any pundits list.

While Congress was unable to send a comprehensive immigration bill to the President last session, Democrats are trying to force the issue again.

The DREAM Act, an acronym for Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors, provide a path to citizenship for immigrant students and those wishing to join the United States military.

The DREAM Act is a one time solution intended to provide a path to a permanent legal status for persons brought illegally or legally to the United States by their parents or guardians as children.

The eligible immigrant would be required to either (1) graduate from a two-year community college, (2) complete at least two years towards a 4-year degree, or (3) serve two years in the U.S. military

To qualify, the immigrant student or soldier would have to meet certain requirements such as:
- Proof of having arrived in the United States at age 15 or younger.
- Proof of residence in the United States for a least five (5) consecutive years since their date of arrival.
- Must be between the ages of 12 and 30 at time of bill passage.
- Having graduated from an American High School, or obtained a GED.
- "Good moral character," essentially defined as the absence of a significant criminal record (or any drug charges whatsoever).

If this bill passes, it would force Bush, the leader of the Republican Party, in a politically awkward spot. Sign it, and he’s soft on immigration and pro amnesty. Veto it, he is hurting collegiate adolocents or, worse, the American military.

What should he do?

What would you do?

What’s your immigration answer?

Speech vs. Hate

2007-09-30T12:51:00.000-05:00

On October 7, 1998, twenty-one year old Matthew Shepard was robbed, pistol whipped, and left for dead in a remote area in Colorado. Sheppard, a homosexual, asked his murderers for a ride home from a bar. The police would eventually find his shoes and wallet in the trunk of the murders car (along with the bloody pistol).

During the trial, the defendants attempted to use the “gay panic defense” arguing they were driven to temporary insanity while Sheppard was making advances at them. They were both found guilty, sentenced to life in prison without parole, and are currently in a Nevada maximum-security facility.

Despite the seriousness of the punishment, Shepard’s story created a national discussion on hate crime legislation. Should punishments be more severe if the crimes were racially or religiously motivated? What if the crimes were committed out of hatred of homosexuals? People with disabilities?

In March of last year, The Matthew Sheppard Act was introduced in the US House of Representatives, and has recently passed through the Senate. It increases the severity of a federal crime (not state) if it was committed because of the victims race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.

President Bush has promised to veto the bill.

Should criminals be given harsher punishments for a “hate crime”?

Does the first amendment play any role in your answer?

It’s worth noting the Shepard’s killers will never see the light of day again, and were not charged with a hate crime.

Tasering the first amendment?

2007-09-25T22:22:00.000-05:00

As Stevenson students debate whether the first amendment protects their senior t-shirts, a different free speech battle has erupted in Colorado.

On Friday, The Rocky Mountain Collegian, the student newspaper for Colorado State University, ran a four-word editorial that read: "Taser this . . . F--- Bush."

The profane editorial was a response to last week's Tasering of a University of Florida student who disrupted a forum with Sen. John Kerry.

Asked by CNN if the editorial could be characterized as vulgar or sophomoric, student editor David McSwane said he "wouldn't entirely disagree."

"We wanted people to understand that free speech is something we should talk about," he told CNN. "We felt that this campus, for one reason or another, has been really apathetic. Too quiet. We felt that the best way to spark that dialogue was to exercise it ourselves."

College Republicans at Colorado State University collected more than 300 signatures calling on CSU's Board of Student Communications to fire McSwane.

Patriot of ’76 can’t help to think of the Hazelwood decision in 1988. The Rehnquist Court ruled that public school student newspapers are not forums for student expression, and are therefore not fully protected by the first amendment.

This, however, was on a college campus. Should the rules be more relaxed?

PO ’76 is reminded of another case, this one involving the use of profanity. In 1973, the Court set up a test to see when speech is obscene (not protected) or expression (is protected). The Miller Test goes as follows.

1. Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
2. Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions specifically defined by applicable state law,
3. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, and scientific value.

Does the editorial pass the Miller Test? Is it protected expression, or obscene speech?

The beauty of our constitution is its brevity. It’s short, and can be interpreted in many different ways. What’s your interpretation?

Iranian speech

2007-09-24T07:45:00.001-05:00

Another day, another battle over free speech in educational institutions.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is traveling to New York to address the United Nations' General Assembly. He was to appear Monday at a question-and- answer session with Columbia (private school) faculty and students as part of the school's World Leaders Forum.

This is the same man who is funding Iraqi insurgents, and providing them with the weapons and intelligence to kill American soldiers.

This is the same man who has openly questioned the Holocaust, and has voiced his desire for Israel to be wiped off of the map.

This is the same man whose nation is constructing a nuclear bomb, against the mandates of the international community.

This is the same man whose country brutally oppresses women and ethnic minorities.

City Council speaker Christine Quinn called Thursday for the university to rescind the invitation, saying "the idea of Ahmadinejad as an honored guest anywhere in our city is offensive to all New Yorkers."
Quinn, a Democrat, said Ahmadinejad was coming to the city "for one reason—to spread his hate-mongering vitriol on the world stage”.

This past week, Columbia Dean John Coatsworth said that he would have “invited Hitler to speak”.

By granting the Iranian President permission to speak, is a university granting legitimacy to the twenty first century’s version of Adolf Hitler? Does it serve any educational purpose?

Offensive speech? What would Tinker say?

2007-09-20T11:44:00.000-05:00

The Court ruled in Tinker v. Des Moines that high school students do not leave their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door. Student are allowed to express themselves politically (in Tinker, it was with a black armband to protest Vietnam) at an American public high school.

That’s not to say that students have complete first amendment protections. Students may not cause a distraction to learning, nor can they use profanity, or reference drugs or alcohol.

High school students are allowed to express themselves politically.

Do school uniforms rob them of that right?

State courts have ruled that uniforms are acceptable. However, in the spirit of Tinker , students in New Jersey decided to test the first amendment. To protest the school uniform policy, two students decided to wear buttons featuring a picture of the Hitler Youth.

According to the Associated Press, the buttons bear the words "no school uniforms" with a slash through them superimposed on a photo of young boys wearing identical shirts and neckerchiefs. There are no swastikas visible on the buttons, but the parties agreed that they depict members of Hitler youth.

Outraged? The school was, threatening suspension if the boys didn’t remove the buttons.

A federal judge certainly wasn’t outraged. He sided with the students, writing that a student may not be punished for merely expressing views unless the school has reason to believe that the speech or expression will 'materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.'"

Are these buttons a distraction? Are they political? Do they satisfy the Tinker requirement?

Giving em Hill

2007-09-17T19:21:00.000-05:00

In 1994, “HillaryCare” cost the Democrats the midterm elections, and branded them the party of high taxes and big government.
Thirteen years later, in a different political climate, Hillary is making the same push as a presidential candidate as she did as first lady: Health care for all Americans.

According to Yahoo News, she called for a requirement for businesses to obtain insurance for employees, and said the wealthy should pay higher taxes to help defray the cost for those less able to pay for it. She put the government's cost at $110 billion a year.

The New York senator said her plan would require every American to purchase insurance, either through their jobs or through a program modeled on Medicare or the federal employee health plan. Businesses would be forced to follow the federal legislation because of the commerce clause in the US Constitution.

Businesses would be required to offer insurance or contribute to a pool that would expand coverage. Individuals and small businesses would be offered tax credits to make insurance more affordable.

Clinton framed her quest as a moral imperative in which individuals, businesses, the insurance industry and the federal government each had a role to play.

Life, liberty, and the pursuit continues…

The apathetic American high school student

2007-09-12T09:41:00.000-05:00

PO76’s last post asked the question if the pledge of allegiance violated the establishment clause of the first amendment.

The responses were diverse, but there seemed to be an outrage over schools outlawing conservative values such as open devotion to country and religion.

On the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, students at one high school were not allowed to wear clothes with an American Flag.

Under a new school rule, students at Hobbton High School are not allowed to wear items with flags, from any country, including the United States.

The new rule stems from a controversy over students wearing shirts bearing flags of other countries.

Students not allowed to wear shirts with American flags to an American public high school.

Is there any connection between rules like this and the dramatic decrease in civic engagement?

Establishment Violation?

2007-09-06T07:21:00.000-05:00

“ Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen”.

You would be hard-pressed to find an American that wouldn’t classify this passage as a prayer. It is references the almighty, it is asking for his blessing, but, perhaps most importantly, it is non-denominational. There are no references to overtly Judeo-Christian tenets.

Then why can’t it be optional for students to recite in a public school?

In 1962, the Supreme Court, by a 6-1 decision, answered that question in the landmark case Engel v. Vitale. The court decided that government-directed prayer in public schools was an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause (as applied to the states by the fourteenth amendment).

Schools must stay neutral on the issue of religion.

This begs the question, when the pledge of allegiance comes on the morning announcements, and the words “under God” are recited to every classroom at our public high school, is this too a violation?

Does SHS violate the establishment clause on a daily basis? What should be done?

The Edwards Plan

2007-09-03T21:35:00.000-05:00

By this time, the number 46,000,000 should be familiar to all Americans. A nation whose birth certificate promised to provide “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” has nearly twenty percent of its citizens with little or no health insurance.

Forty-six million Americans are uninsured. Although there are a myriad of reasons, the most common cause is the rapidly rising cost of health care. It’s simply too expensive for many companies to provide their employees with health care, and students and the self employed often times choose to spend their money on short term needs (food, shelter, etc..)

Needless to say, it promises to be a major issue for the 2008 election.

North Carolina Democrat John Edwards wants universal care. His plan, according to Edwards, “requires that everybody be covered. It requires that everybody get preventive care. If you are going to be in the system, you can't choose not to go to the doctor for 20 years. You have to go in and be checked and make sure that you are OK”

Mandatory doctor visits for preventative care.

Edwards said his mandatory health care plan would cover preventive, chronic and long-term health care. The plan would include mental health care as well as dental and vision coverage for all Americans

Edwards said his plan would cost up to $120 billion a year, a cost he proposes covering by ending President Bush's tax cuts to people who make more than $200,000 per year.

Mandatory doctors visits and the rich being forced to pay cover the middle-lower class. Is this the right move?

If you don’t like the Edwards plan, what’s your plan?

The war continues

2007-08-28T20:38:00.000-05:00

Everyone is getting on board.

As many Illinois residents know, Governor Rod Blagojevich recently signed a bull that outlawed smoking in all public places in Illinois. It is a part of the ongoing effort of many states to place more regulations on smokers and tobacco users.

Recently, presidential candidates in both parties, have indicated that they support this movement.

Democrat Hillary Clinton said she supports smoking bans in public places across the country, while Republican Mike Huckabe echoed her sentiment.

Could a national ban be too far away?

Smokers beware. Local officials have been joined by national figures. The nation’s war against tobacco is still underway.

Freedom or Finally?

2007-08-27T17:03:00.000-05:00

It seems as if one of the biggest cities in the nation has been listening to high school teachers all across American. Baggy pants that show boxer shorts or thongs may be banned in Atlanta, according to a proposed amendment to the city's indecency laws.

The proposed ordinance would also bar women from showing the strap of a thong beneath their pants. They would also be prohibited from wearing jogging bras in public or show a bra strap.

The proposed ordinance states that "the indecent exposure of his or her undergarments" would be unlawful in a public place. It would go in the same portion of the city code that outlaws sex in public and the exposure or fondling of genitals.

The penalty would be a fine in an amount to be determined, Martin said.
Any legislation that creates a dress code would not survive a court challenge, Seagraves said.

Atlanta would not be the first city to take on sagging pants.
Earlier this year, the town council in Delcambre, Louisiana, passed an ordinance that carries a fine of up to $500 or six months in jail for exposing underwear in public. Several other municipalities and parish governments in Louisiana have enacted similar laws in recent months.

Is this protecting public decency, or robbing individuals of their freedom of expression?

Bush using Vietnam

2007-08-23T18:52:00.000-05:00

On Wednesday, President Bush dove directly into a topic that his administration has been avoided since the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003. While critics have likened the war to the Vietnam Conflict, The President made his case for continued reconstruction of Iraq by using the wars aftermath as a cautionary tale. Then, as now, Bush said, "people argued the real problem was America's presence and that if we would just withdraw, the killing would end." He then listed the tragedies that followed the U.S. withdrawal from Southeast Asia -- the Khmer Rouge slaughter in Cambodia, the harsh communist rule in Vietnam. "The price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like 'boat people,' 're-education camps' and 'killing fields.' " Likewise, he argued, innocents will pay if a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq empowers Al Qaeda”.

Do you buy the analogy? Is protecting Iraqi civilians reason enough to ask American troops to continue to sacrifice? Do we owe them that?

YOU(tube) and I talking politics

2007-07-23T13:16:00.000-05:00

Welcome to our virtual discussion. This election is all about us. What do YOU(tube) have to say??

Finals Time, Semester II

2007-05-29T13:20:00.000-05:00

"Men died for us. We have an obligation to live our lives with honesty and integrity to honor their sacrifice"
- Rick Davis

Click here for Questions 1-10

Click here for Questions 11-20

Click here for Questions 21-30

Click here for Questions 31-40

Click here for another version of Questions 31-40

Click here for questions 41-50

Click here for Questions 51-60

Click here for questions 61-70

Click here for another version of questions 61-70

Click here for questions 71-80

Click here for Questions 81-90

Click here for another version of Questions 81-90

Click here for Questions 91-95

Review Guide for Final

2007-05-23T06:43:00.000-05:00

For the American Government review guide, click Archives back to December, 2006

What they'll remember about you...

2007-05-13T11:00:00.000-05:00

Sen. Sam Brownback found out the hard way that Americans like candidates that share their values and interests. Often times, candidates must adapt their stump speeches to different regions and locales.

The GOP presidential hopeful drew boos and groans Friday at the Wisconsin Republican Party convention when he used a football analogy to talk about the need to focus on families.

"This is fundamental blocking and tackling," he said. "This is your line in football. If you don't have a line, how many passes can Peyton Manning complete? Greatest quarterback, maybe, in NFL history."

Oops, wrong team to mention in Packerland.

Realizing what he had said, the Kansas Republican slumped at the podium and put his head in his hands.

"That's really bad," he said. "That will go down in history. I apologize."
His apology brought a smattering of applause and laughter. He tried to recover, saying former Packer Bart Starr may be the greatest of all time, but the crowd was still restless.

"Let's take Favre then," Brownback said. "The Packers are great. I'm sorry. How many passes does he complete without a line?"

"All of them!" more than one person yelled from the back.

"I'm not sure how I recover from this," Brownback said. "My point is we've got to rebuild the family. I'll get off this."

Brownback’s gaffe was reminiscent of John Kerry in 2004, when the Democratic candidate called Lambeau Field “Lambert Field”(note: Kerry did still win the state).

Most Americans are not ideologues. They don’t carefully research each position of the contenders. Instead, they use shortcuts, or heuristics, to make their judgment.

Maybe next time Brownback is in Lake Geneva, he’ll pay homage to the man that Wisconsinites wish was running for President.

Contradiction?

2007-05-08T12:45:00.000-05:00

John Edwards is an extremely rich populist.

If you think that sounds like an oxy moron, you’re not alone.

Edwards will release his financial disclosure later this week, a step frequently taken by presidential candidates. His advisors are leaking parts of it so Americans don’t see just how rich Edwards is in one fall swoop.

We know Edwards enjoys getting $400 haircuts

We know Edwards has an enormous house in North Carolina.

Today, we found out that Edwards worked for a hedge fund called Fortress Investment Group. The company claims to have $35.1 billion in assets under management.

Edwards is the same man that runs on the platform of eliminating poverty and providing health care to all Americans. He believes that the best way to achieve these goals is by raising income taxes on Americans making over $200,000 per year.

Is there a contradiction between campaigning against poverty while working for a hedge fund that is designed to make rich people richer?

If nothing else, it certainly is a distraction from Edwards’ message.

Rightly so?

Last AP Review Session

2007-05-04T15:37:00.001-05:00

Join us for our final REVIEW Sunday night May 6. The 2Regular Guys will be bringing their radio review to Bruce DuMont’s show Beyond the Beltway on WLS radio, 890 AM.

Beyond the Beltway with Bruce DuMont is a "live" weekly two-hour nationally-syndicated radio program that takes America's political pulse and provides a fresh and balanced perspective of national politics. The program is produced every Sunday night from 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM (CT) at the Radio Hall of Fame Studios in The Museum of Broadcast Communications in Chicago.

JOIN US ON THE AIR LIVE BY CALLING
1-800-723-8289
OR EMAIL BRUCE DuMONT AT
BTB@museum.tv

The radio version of Beyond the Beltway is heard on more than 60 stations from coast- to-coast. Audio also streamed live every Sunday on ( WLS - Chicago) , WNOX - Knoxville, KCMO - Kansas City and WNTK - New London, NH.

For a live audio/video stream click here : BeyondtheBeltway.com.

Too much government?

2007-05-02T07:26:00.000-05:00

The oldest debate facing this country remains what exactly is the role of government? The same question that Hamilton and Jefferson debated centuries ago in Philadelphia is still raging in state houses all across the country.

The Illinois House overwhelmingly approved a statewide smoking ban in public places Tuesday that would eliminate a confusing patchwork of local laws and leave smokers in every community with one place in common to light up—outside.

The House's 73-42 vote sent the measure to Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who indicated he would sign legislation that advocates say would make Illinois the 19th state to impose a broad smoking ban.

Supporters said the bill would fix the crazy-quilt of smoking bans passed by municipalities after the legislature in 2005 gave them the power to adopt local rules.

The state legislation would prohibit smoking in all public buildings and in most businesses and government vehicles. Smoking would be illegal in bars and restaurants, as well as places ranging from student dormitories to private homes in which businesses open to the public are operated.

Opponents contended the legislation would destroy already troubled small businesses, such as mom-and-pop bars that provide customers a place to party down and light up.

The U.S. surgeon general issued a study last year that found there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke and that even brief exposure can cause immediate harm. The study found that non-smokers exposed to second-hand smoke at home and work increased their risk of developing heart disease and lung cancer by up to 30 percent.

The report said the only way to protect from the dangers of second-hand smoke is to eliminate indoor smoking.

Blagojevich said he would likely sign the ban, adding that he "would be shocked if there were something in that bill that I didn't like and would keep me from signing it."

Government intrusion or maintaining public safety?

Too much government?

Impeachment?

2007-05-01T18:45:00.000-05:00

Rep. John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, wants to bring the troops home from Iraq, and he says he is willing to impeach President Bush to do it.

When, in November 2005, Murtha, a decorated Vietnam veteran and pro-military moderate, called for getting U.S. troops out of Iraq, it became a very big deal.

That was 18 months ago. The troops are still there, even more are headed that way, and Murtha wants action now. He said, "Mr. President, the public has spoken. There's three ways or four ways to influence a president. One is popular opinion, the election, third is impeachment and fourth is, and fourth is the purse."

Asked if impeachment was possible, Murtha said, "I'm just saying that's one way to influence a president".

Yes, it is one way.

The Constitution says the House of Representatives can impeach the president, vice president and other civil officers for "treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

If John Murtha actually thinks George Bush is a criminal -- and thinks he can prove it -- then he should go ahead and try to impeach him. After all, President Bush did authorize the NSA to issue warrantless wiretaps.

It takes a simple majority vote in the House of Representatives to impeach and a two-thirds vote in the Senate to convict.

According to Politico Roger Simon, Democratic arguments against impeachment could be summed up in two words: President Cheney.

That alone ought to make George Bush impeachment-proof.

Impeachment for purely political reasons?

It’s not unprecedented

Congress Podcast

2007-04-26T15:08:00.000-05:00

"Congress: Bingo with billions"
- Red Skelton

Click here for Congress/Interest Group Podcast

Have fun, and good luck. If you have time, tell us about the interesting places that you review

Reid vs. Bush...Gotta love Divided Government!

2007-04-24T19:07:00.000-05:00

After a conference committee meeting (great vocabulary word!), House and Senate Democratic appropriators agreed Monday on a $124 billion bill that would fund the Iraq war but order troops to begin leaving by Oct. 1 with the goal of completing the pullout six months later.

The bill will be on the President’s desk in several days, and he has already stated his intentions. For the second time in his presidency, President Bush will exercise his constitutional power and veto this bill.

Democrats would need a two-thirds majority to override a presidential veto.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who says the war in Iraq is "lost," likened Bush to President Lyndon Johnson, saying Johnson ordered troop escalations in Vietnam in an attempt "to save his political legacy" only to watch U.S. casualties climb steadily.

According to Breitbart.com, the emerging legislation would require the withdrawal of U.S. forces to begin by Oct. 1, even earlier if Bush cannot certify that the Iraqi government is making progress in disarming militias, reducing sectarian violence and forging political compromises.

Another provision in the measure would withhold about $850 million in foreign aid from the Iraqis if the government does not meet those standards.

The Pentagon would be required to adhere to certain standards for the training and equipping of units sent to Iraq, and for their rest at home between deployments. Bush could waive the guidelines if necessary. Democrats assume he would, but they want him on record as doing so.

A showdown is set. A Democratic Congress vs. a Republican President. This is the beauty of divided government-it fosters debate and compromise.

Speaking of debate, what’s your stance?

Reid or Bush?

Do we need more Gore?

2007-04-22T08:52:00.000-05:00

Just when you thought the Democratic field was set, rumors are circulating about another heavyweight entering the race.

The Telegraph, a British Newspaper, has reported that Al Gore has secretly assembled a campaign team for the former vice-president to make a fresh bid for the White House.

Gore has said that he wants to concentrate on publicizing the need to combat global climate change, a case made in his film that won him an Oscar earlier this year.

One of his former campaign team said: "I was asked whether I would be available towards the end of the year if I am needed. They know he has not ruled out running and if he decides to jump in, he will have to move very fast.

Vice-President Gore's allies believe that Hillary Clinton, 59, the frontrunner, is unable to win the presidency. The most recent poll shows a growing number of voters think negatively of her, in contrast to Mr Gore, who enjoys far greater popularity than when he lost the 2000 presidential race despite receiving for popular votes than George W. Bush. Gore is polling third, only a few points below Barack Obama.

At least eight websites are campaigning to "Draft Gore" into the election. More than 70,000 people have signed an online petition, and more than 120 groups of Gore supporters meet each month around the country to promote the case for a Gore presidency.

Should Hillary be nervous? Should Republicans? Since most Americans use heuristics when they visit their polling places, will that help or hurt Gore?

I plead the second

2007-04-18T19:01:00.000-05:00

"The unfortunate situation in Virginia could have been avoided," she said, "if congressional leaders stood up to the gun lobby." -

-Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), whose husband was killed by a gunman in 1993

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
- The Second Amendment

Monday's deadly rampage at Virginia Tech University has lighted the fuse for another round in the long-running debate over gun control, an issue that will be very important in the upcoming presidential election of 2008.

Leaders of both major political parties focused their reactions on expressions of sympathy for the victims and their families while avoiding comment on gun control.

In brief remarks from the White House, President Bush expressed the nation's grief.

"Schools should be places of sanctuary and learning," Bush said. "When that sanctuary is violated, the impact is felt in every American classroom and every American community."

Bush, a longtime champion of the right to bear arms, said nothing about the gun-control debate.

Similarly, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) expressed sorrow at the event but remained silent on gun control. In the past, Democrats often have been at the forefront of the fight for tighter gun laws, but the party recently has been trying to broaden its appeal to hunters and others who oppose more controls.

Virginia's gun laws, like those of many states, make it easy to buy and own firearms, including handguns, and the state has been criticized often as the source of guns used in crimes in the Washington area and in other East Coast cities. But the lack of information made it impossible to say what role, if any, state laws might have played.

The incident has led many Americans to demand a uniformed federal standard for all gun purchases. This would mean closing loopholes on background checks (currently, these checks are not performed at gun shows and through private transactions).
As the debate heats up, PO’ 76 wants your stance on gun control. Could this incident have been prevented? Or could the effect have been lessened if VA Tech students or faculty were armed as well? Is the second amendment outdated? How would you handle this if you were a politician?

Media Podcast

2007-04-12T12:48:00.000-05:00

“The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power. Because they control the minds of the masses.”
-Malcolm X

Click here for Media Podcast

Follow the Leader

2007-04-11T21:54:00.000-05:00

If recent history is any judge, young people will be aggressively urged by parents, teachers, politicians, and celebrities to vote in 2008. Your government professor will try to make it seem relevant. Puff Daddy (is it P-Diddy now) will try to make it seem cool. However, if you live in Illinois, you will be faced with the same existential question that most Americans ponder every fourth November: Thanks to the Electoral College, does my vote matter?

Because of the winner-take-all feature of each states electoral votes, the only votes that are actively contested are those in battle-ground states. Obama, Clinton, and Rudy will spend months in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Unfortunately, the only time they’ll be in Chicago is to fundraise.

Do you feel disempowered yet? Is it any surprise that our voter turnout hovers around fifty percent for Presidential elections?

Before you defect to Canada, check out Maryland’s solution.

According to the New Yorker, Governor Martin O’Mally is close to signing a bill that would make Maryland the first to pledge itself to the National Popular Vote plan. This interstate compact would restrict the Electoral College to a ceremonial role, much like the Queen of England. The idea is that once enough states have signed on to put together a majority of electoral votes (271), those state agree that their electors will ALWAYS vote for the winner of the popular vote in all fifty states and Washington D.C.

If other states adopted this plan, it could alter our entire political system without amending the constitution (remember: 3/4s of states much agree to amend. The battleground states would form a coalition). If every state was worth contesting, Presidential elections would be truly national. Grassroots politics would blossom everywhere, not just in the swing states.

Cheers to Maryland for reignited the debate on the usefulness of the Electoral College. Will other states play “follow the leader”?

(Are there any brave souls out there that would like to make an argument for the Electoral College?)

Executive Branch Review

2007-04-10T16:25:00.001-05:00

"When you get to be President, there are all those things, the honors, the twenty-one gun salutes, all those things. You have to remember it isn't for you. It's for the Presidency."
-Harry S. Truman

Click here for a Podcast review session on the Executive Branch

McCain-in-the-tank?

2007-04-08T11:36:00.000-05:00

In 1988, Presidential candidate Michael Dukakis had a problem. The United States was in the midst of the Cold War, and the Massachusetts Governor was viewed as being soft on defense, particularly on the controversial “Star Wars” program, which Dukakis promised to scale down. Dukasis was facing Vice President George H.W. Bush, the Vice President to the man many credited with winning the Cold War.

In response to this, Dukakis orchestrated what would become the key image of his campaign, albeit not for the reasons he intended. In September 1988, Dukakis visited the General Dynamics plant in Michigan to take part in a photo op in an M1 Abrams tank. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher of the United Kingdom had been photographed in a similar situation in 1986, riding in a Challenger tank while wearing a scarf; although somewhat out of character, the image was effective and helped Thatcher's re-election prospects. Dukakis's "tank moment" was much less successful. Footage of Dukakis was used in television ads by the Bush campaign, as evidence that Dukakis would not make a good commander-in-chief, and "Dukakis in the tank" remains shorthand for backfired public relations outings.

Two decades later, Senator and presidential aspirant John McCain has the opposite problem that Dukakis had in 1988. McCain is tied to what most Americans believe to be a failed policy of Iraq. McCain supported the “surge” of troops several months ago, causing Democrats to coin the phrase “McCain Doctrine” when refereeing to the Presidents ambitions in the region. McCain believes that victory is within reach, and that Iraqi society has benefited tremendously from the U.S. occupation.

On April 1st, McCain and Republican colleague Lindsay Graham strolled through Baghdad’s Shorja market. Protected by more than a hundred American soldiers, three Black Hawk helicopters, and two Apache gun ships, the senator celebrated the “progress” and “good news” in Iraq. What was meant as a photo op to prove to the world that the media coverage of Iraq wrongly portrays it as a nation decrepit with violence was shunted when images of McCain in a bulletproof vest and army entourage appeared in every major newspaper.

The press quickly dubbed the moment as the “Dukakis-in-the-tank- photo op”

Once the favorite for the Republican nomination, McCain has slipped into a distant third in the polls and in fund raising. His decision to be the candidate that supports an escalation to the war has just been memorialized by a photo that will surely haunt him on the campaign trail (think: heuristics).

It’s worth noting that on the day after McCain’s stroll, 21 of the Shorja market’s merchants were ambushed and killed.

Cheering on a waiting disaster?

2007-04-04T12:13:00.000-05:00

In 1898, University of Minnesota student Johnny Campbell stood in front of a crowd at a sporting event and led them in an organized cheer. Campbell noticed that the crowd was eager to join him, and eventually the entire audience was cheering with one, unified voice. This spontaneous action turned Campbell into the nation’s first cheerleader.

Cheerleading has certainly come a long way. Today’s cheerleaders are predominately female (Although President Bush as a cheerleader at Yale). Cheerleaders are expected to do more than unify an audience with a series of chants. Cheerleaders frequently perform dances and tricks once reserved for trapeze artists.

More importantly, cheerleaders may be in more danger than any other athlete in the country.

According to the New York Times, emergency room visits for cheerleading injuries nationwide have more than doubled since the early 1990s, far outpacing the growth in the number of cheerleaders, and the rate of life-threatening injuries has startled researchers. Of 104 catastrophic injuries sustained by female high school and college athletes from 1982 to 2005 — head and spinal trauma that occasionally led to death — more than half resulted from cheerleading.

All sports combined did not surpass cheerleading.

Inadequate training of coaches is the most frequently cited cause of injuries. Inexperienced coaches will have squads try complex stunts without following accepted step-by-step progressions to acquire the skills required to safely attempt the trick.

Perhaps there is a better solution.

PO ’76 knows this is dangerous waters because Stevenson cheerleaders are so talented and entertaining.

But….

If the IHSA banned cheerleaders from the sidelines of High School sporting events, what would be the result? Would crowds decrease? Would the games be less meaniningful, or even less fun?

Or, would thousands of girls from across Illinois be spared of the rising danger of life altering injury?

Another Great Communicator?

2007-03-27T23:11:00.000-05:00

“Hail to the Chief we have chosen for the nation,
Hail to the Chief! We salute him, one and all”
- Official Anthem of the President of the United States

“Da Da Da Da Da…boom boom…Da Da Da Da…”
- Law and Order theme song

Hollywood has given Washington several notable politicians. Sonny Bono went from a Billboard star to Congressman from California. Arnold Schwarzenegger retired his Terminator suit for a suite in the Governors mansion in Sacramento. The biggest star to grace Washington was former President Ronald Reagan, whose role in Knute Rocke, All American, helped earn him the reputation as “The Great Communicator”, and perhaps catapulted him into the White House.

The President as a conservative Republican with roots in Hollywood? Seems like an oxy moron. Certainly lightening couldn’t strike again in the same place.

Enter Fred Dalton Thompson. Thompson is a former U.S. attorney, co-chief counsel to the Watergate investigation committee, and Republican Senator from Tennessee. In the final months of his term he joined the cast of the long-running NBC drama Law and Order. In doing so, he became the first serving U.S. Senator concurrently to hold a full-time television acting job; however, his first scenes as Branch were filmed during the Senate's August 2002 recess, so he missed no legislative time in order to act on television.

Roughly two weeks ago, Thompson said he was considering a run for president. Since then, he has skyrocketed out of nowhere to rank third among GOP White House hopefuls in a new USA Today/Gallup poll published Tuesday. The poll shows former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani with 31 percent, Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, with 22 percent, and Thompson with 12 percent of the vote.He's even surpassed former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who was the favorite of only 3 percent in the poll.

Experts and pundits agree on the reason for Thompson’s strong showing: he is very popular with the conservative base, something that the other candidates lack.

Why hasn't a single candidate pulled ahead with conservatives? Strategists say McCain hasn't gained overall momentum, Giuliani supports abortion and gay rights, and although Romney is now viewed as a conservative, that wasn't always the case.

Patriot of '76 looks forward to the Richardson vs. Thompson Vice Presidential canditate debate in 2008.

Click here for the AP Govt. Review Guide

Any of our business?

2007-03-23T21:16:00.000-05:00

My mother is a teacher in her early sixties. She lives in Deerfield, enjoys a comfortable lifestyle, and usually votes Democratic (Kirk is always the exception). She doesn’t follow politics much, but she always votes. Needless to say, she uses heuristics to make her choices. She’s less concerned with how a candidate stands on campaign finance reform. She wants to know how he performed on Oprah or if he cheats on his wife.

I asked my mom about John Edward’s decision to stay in the race, despite announcing that his wife, Elizabeth, has cancer. Dr. Lisa Carey, the oncologist treating Edwards, categorized the cancer as metastatic Stage 4 cancer, which is largely confined to the bones. She said the prognosis was good.

My mother believes that it is deplorable that Edwards is still in the race. “He has young children, and cancer is unpredictable. Who knows how many good years she has left?”

To many, the fact that the Edwards campaign is continuing on full speed is a sign that he candidate places personal ambition over an obligation to family. Many voters, especially soccer moms, would feel compelled to curtail their professional responsibilities if their spouse was diagnosed with an incurable disease. To these voters, Edwards, who prides himself on being a populist, is very hard to identify with.

"From our perspective, there was no reason to stop," the candidate said. "I don't think we seriously thought about it."

He said, "You can go cower in the corner and hide or you can go out there and stand up for what you believe in. We have no intentions of cowering in the corner."
In this age of YouTube and 24/7 media coverage, a candidate’s personal life is not only in bounds, it can be a major factor in the outcome of the election. My mother represents an important demographic. By staying in the race, is Edwards bravely pursuing the presidency despite medical setbacks? Or is he selfishly putting personal ambition over family?

Click here for the AP Govt. Review Guide

Here it is....

2007-03-21T18:13:00.000-05:00

CLick here for the AP Govt. Test Review Guide

WWUD (What would U do?)

2007-03-20T17:08:00.000-05:00

Juneau resident Joseph Frederick had no idea that his actions would ignite a nationwide debate on freedom of speech when he unfurled his fourteen-foot long banner as the Olympic torch was passing by. Douglas and fellow students were allowed to leave the grounds of Juneau-Douglas High School so they could watch the torch. Douglas’s sign was meant to get him on TV. It wound up costing him a ten day suspension.

What did the sign say"

"BONG HITS 4 JESUS"

Frederick claimed that the suspension violated his rights, citing the 1969 case of Tinker v. Des Moines This case held that students to have the right of free speech, which can be suppressed only when speech disrupts school activities or the learning environment. The San-Francisco based 9th Circuit United States Court of Appeals agreed.

The case has made it all the way to the Court of Last Resort, the USSC. The Bush administration is even weighing in, arguing that schools have the authority to limit talk about drugs because of the importance of keeping drugs away from young people.

Nobody doubts that Frederick’s message was inappropriate. However, did it significantly interfere with any learning environment? In other words, was the experience of seeing the Olympic torch lessened in any way for the other students because of this sign?

More importantly, if the Court does rule in favor of the student (side note: Kenneth Starr, former prosecutor of the Clinton impeachment case, is arguing for the district), will students be granted more discretion over choices they make concerning their self expression?

If you’re clerking for Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, Ginsburg, Thomas, Stevens, Scalia, Alito, or Souter, how do you advise them on this case?

The forgotten problem

2007-03-19T15:30:00.000-05:00

Roughly one-third of the people living in our nation’s capital are functionally illiterate, according to a new report by the Department of Education. That translates to 36 percent of the population, and it is rising quickly. The national average is 21 percent.

Most of these people are immigrants who are not proficient in English.
Adults are considered functionally illiterate if they have trouble doing such things as comprehending bus schedules, reading maps and filling out job applications.

The District of Columbia Chamber of Commerce, which contributed to the report, said the city lost up to $107 million in taxes annually between 2000 and 2005 because of a lack of qualified job applicants.

That’s 107 million dollars that could be given to schools or shelters. High illiteracy rates are literally taking food off of the plates of our nations poor.

What’s the solution to this problem?

As Congress debates immigration reform, perhaps they should spend some time insuring that all new Americans are literate Americans. Will this be expensive? Yes. Will it pay for itself in the long run? Perhaps.

Is this forced assimilation?

You be the judge

It's important to note that this is NOT just an immigration issue. Schools are graduating students without basic reading skills. As these Americans enter into the workforce, there is a good chance they never go back to school to learn to read and write.

March Madness

2007-03-14T18:11:00.001-05:00

It's bracket time ladies and gentlemen. As people all across the world fill out their picks for the NCAA championship, Patriot of '76 has our own spin.

Jeffrey Rosen, an AP U.S. History teacher, has devised a brilliant bracket. Each President is grouped by their geographic region, and awarded a seed based on rankings done by noted historians (higher ranking president get lower seed. Thus, George Washington is a #1).

IF YOUR COMPUTER CAN'T MAKE THE BRACKET LARGE ENOUGH, CLICK HERE

Fill out the bracket, and give us your final 4 Presidents. Winners should be chosen based on contributions to American society, progress, and security.

Were there any upsets? This is MADNESS!

49 down, 1 to go

2007-03-12T17:52:00.000-05:00

PO 76 disclaimer: If you are offended or sickened by animal rights abuses, you may want to stop reading this blog entry.

Governor Bill Richardson has taken another step in his drive for the Presidency by signing a bill into law making New Mexico the forty-ninth state to ban cockfighting. Louisiana is the one state in the union that still allows this controversial practice

Cockfighting involves roosters with razors tied to their claws battling to the death with spectators placing bets on the outcome of each contest.

Several New Mexicans are outraged, claiming that cockfighting is an integral part of their culture, and banning it is tantamount to outlawing baseball or football. State Sen. Phil Griego, a Democrat who opposed the ban, called it a "slippery slope.""What's next? A ban on rodeos? Then hunting and fishing?”

Men have died or have been paralyzed in the boxing ring, football field, and hockey rink. Dogs and horses that are unable to race anymore are frequently put down. Violence has always been a part of American sports. Is this ban on cockfighting long overdue, or is it targeted assimilation?

At this moment, you’re probably wondering if Patriot of ’76 has gone off of the deep end.

There is a bigger argument. Banning cockfighting will most likely make the practice go underground, similar to what happened with dogfights. Is it Ok to ban a practice that is impossible to enforce? Why not keep it legal, but regulate it to minimize the cruelty to the animal?

Crazy like a Fox

2007-03-08T20:05:00.000-06:00

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards has refused to participate in an August 14 debate co-hosted by the Nevada Democratic Party and Fox News. The Edwards team has cited the involvement of Fox News, which is often accused of having a conservative bias, as part of his decision to pass.

Fox News has a reputation as being the mouthpiece of the Republican Party. Anchor Chris Wallace went after former President Clinton. Bill O’Reilly’s favorite two people to bash are Jimmy Carter and Michael Moore (in a rare moment of partisanship, Patriot of ’76 agrees that Carter was a week President and a strange and diluted former President). Tony Snow, the former host of Fox News Sunday, is now the press secretary for the Bush White House.

The Edwards team is making a statement; their man is the real liberal candidate. If the NDA wants Edwards in, they’ll drop Fox as a host.

Edwards is doing something that no legitimate candidate has done. He is, essentially, calling for a boycott of the most popular news network on television (yes, Fox has more viewers then CNN).

Is this a line in the sand? Fox claims to be “fair and balanced”. Do you buy it?

Don’t just go based on what you’ve heard. P0 ’76 has a challenge. Watch the first 10 minutes of a Fox News program and the first 10 minutes of CNN show. Which did each network lead with? How did they cover the issues? Do you see a difference? (Perhaps your favorite A.P. Government teacher would hook you up with some extra credit)

Is Edwards out of line? Or is trying to please liberals to win the primaries?

Debates are a great chance for candidates to get their message out without spending a dime. In addition, Edwards is articulate, charming, and passionate. Is he foolish for saying no? Or is he crazy….like a FOX.

Patriot of 76 Prediction

2007-03-06T21:07:00.000-06:00

The much embattled and controversial Dick Cheney has been diagnosed with a blood clot in his left leg. The 66-year-old has a history of health problems, including four heart attacks and a quadruple bypass surgery.

Cheney, perhaps the most powerful Vice President in US history, is also one of the most divisive. He is strongly linked to the war in Iraq as strategies keep failing and causalities continue to mount. Most Americans are opposed to the war, and pundits believe that the issue single-handedly cost Republicans the midterms in 2006.

Twenty months before the election of 2008, Republicans are a minority in Congress, and face a dogfight with two of the brightest stars in Washington.

Can the Republicans use Cheney’s health to their advantage?

Certainly. Here’s how:

If Cheney were to step down as VP (citing health reasons, of course), President Bush could nominate Joe Lieberman. Lieberman is a Democrat from Connecticut. However, Lieberman is a firm supporter of the President’s foreign policies. He supported and continues to support the war, which cost him the primary election in the Connecticut senatorial race (he eventually ran as an independent, and won).

Being a Senator, Lieberman would most likely be confirmed. This move would show the President’s ability to bridge the gap between political parties. It may win a Republican some moderate votes in 2008.

As you know, the Democrats control the Senate by only one vote (51-49, Cheney casts the tie breaking vote). If Lieberman moved down Pennsylvania Ave. to the White House, it would leave a vacant seat. The Governor of Connecticut, M. Jodi Rell, would be responsible for nominating his replacement. Rell is, obviously, a Republican. This would give Republicans control of the Senate. Most importantly, it would give them confirmation power over any potential Supreme Court nominee (two justices are well into their eighties). Another pro lifer could mobilize the base, just in time for 2008.

The Democrats are making headlines for having a female, African American, and Hispanic presidential contenders.. Republicans can beat them to the punch, and retake the Senate, by putting the first Jewish person in the White House.

This could mean "shalom" to the Democratic control of the legislative branch.

Underdog!

2007-03-05T13:50:00.001-06:00

As noted in my previous blog entry, the mass media has set the stage for voters more than one year before the primaries. Voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina have been told repeatedly that the battle for the Democratic nomination is between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, with John Edwards as the wildcard. Obama and Clinton are fund raising machines. This has allowed them to get their message across, and score hours of free advertising through the evening news and editorials.

By now, we all know the stories of the heavyweights. They are polished. They are coached by the most expensive and experienced campaign staffs available. Their speeches have been tested through focus groups, and are based largely off of what polls tell them that John Q. Public wants to hear.

Does a guy like Bill Richardson have a chance? Who is Bill Richardson?

Richardson is the current governor of New Mexico, reelected with sixty-nine percent of the vote (not easy to do as a Democrat in a Red state). He served as a Congressman for fourteen years, and later was the energy secretary (Energy will be an important campaign issue). Unlike Obama, he has foreign policy experience. Richardson was U.N. ambassador and also worked in the State Department.

Perhaps most importantly, Richardson is not a senator. No senator has been elected since 1961. The last two Democratic presidents, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, were southern governors.

Richardson, who is Hispanic, was born in California and raised in Mexico City. He is personable, well spoken, and approachable. This could make him a favorite among reporters.

A Hispanic governor from a red state with foreign policy and energy experience.

Introducing the next Vice President of the United States…

Showdown in the Midwest: Why Iowa is CRUCIAL

2007-03-03T13:49:00.000-06:00

Perhaps the biggest anomaly about the 2008 election is that there is no incumbent president or designated incumbent (Nixon, Ford, G.H.W. Bush, Gore) running for either party's nomination. Thus the media are going to have to cover two party presidential nomination fights at the same time.

The Gatekeepers are more powerful than ever before.

“Media coverage is the oxygen of politics”. Candidates who get media coverage can continue to raise money and candidates who don't get coverage can't usually disappear.

Because the news divisions are less and less profitable, the bias of the television media in 2008 will be to shut off as much oxygen to as many candidates as possible as soon as possible. Which is one reason we have the current coverage configuration, which implicitly states that (1) Clinton and Obama are the front-runners on the Democratic side, with Edwards as the wild-card position player (in Iowa) and (2) McCain and Giuliani are the front-runners on the Republican side, with Romney as the wild-card position player. Everyone else gets the multi-candidate forum coverage package and that's it. If they want day-to-day coverage, they can go generate local coverage. They're not in the national coverage budget.

Given this configuration, the name of the game for the front-runners is "shut off all the oxygen to everyone else early." Which, translated, means: win Iowa and New Hampshire, and the game is over. Lose those two states: it's time to start vying for the Vice Presidency or a Cabinet position.

Farewell to the Chief

2007-02-26T17:09:00.000-06:00

Last Wednesday, as the Fighting Illini Men’s basketball team defeated Michigan, it was not only the last game for senior players. The University of Illinois retired its eighty-one year old Indian mascot, Chief Illiniwek, after much controversy and debate (as a side issue, does the name “Fighting Illini” stereotype Native Americans as overly aggressive warlords?)

If you have been to an Illinois game, you know the halftime routine. A white student dressed in Native American regalia dances around as the crowd cheers wildly. He portrays the fictitious chief of a tribe that was actually a confederacy (Kaskaskia, Cahokia, Peoria, Tamaroa, Moingwena, and Michigamea).

In 2005, the NCAA deemed the mascot an offensive use of American Indian imagery, and barred the University from hosting post-season events. As the University began losing money and exposure from these sanctions, they began to cave.

Needless to say, most student and community members were outraged. The Chief, they believe, stands for power, integrity, and honor. Many Native Americans agree. In 2002, a Peter Harris Research Group poll of those who declared Native American ethnicity on a U.S. census showed that 81% of Native Americans support the use of Indian nicknames in high school and college sports.

Regardless, The University of Illinois is a pubic institution and a place of higher learning. Have taxpayers been supporting institutionalized racism? On the other hand, in an era where Native Americans are forgotten citizens, isn’t the University honoring and calling a great amount of attention to their roots?

Put yourself on the line and tell us where you stand on the Chief.

Truman's impact

2007-02-22T20:12:00.000-06:00

On August 6, 1945, an atomic bomb was dropped on the Japanese city of Hiroshima., killing roughly 140,000 people. Three days later, a nuclear bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki, killing roughly 74,000 people. Most of the dead were civilians. On August 15, Japan did something that they refused to do at Iwo Jima and Okinawa; they surrendered.

As Iran gets closer to developing nuclear technology, is the only country to ever use atomic bombs against an enemy in any position to lecture?

Once in a while, Patriot of 76 gets historical rather than political. Put yourself in the shoes of our 33rd President. Would you have done the same? Did Truman’s decision ultimately save lives, or did it forever undermine American credibility?

Officer Democracy

2007-02-17T17:49:00.000-06:00

Institutions receive all of the attention. Far more time is spent in civics class studying the three branches of government than any other topic. Why do the first three articles of the Constitution get all of the love? Why do the Illinois standards of education place such an emphasis on judicial review and executive authority, but callously omit the importance of local governance?

What aspect of government, aside from public school, affects the lives of young people the most? Which governmental agency are students most likely to see? With which government officials will students most likely interact? The answer to these questions is the same as the answer to this question: “Bad boys Bad Boys-what’cha gonna do, what’cha gonna do when they come for you”?

The police!

James Madison argued that a democratic government must be able to control the governed and control itself. Industrial societies use police to control crime and contribute to public order. Police departments are subject to the rule of law (as opposed to at the behest of a powerful person or Party), have limited authority, and are accountable to the public. In a sense, in their most basic and honorable form, the police epitomize our view of democratic government.

Patriot of ’76 decided to learn more about this integral government agency by sitting in the passenger seat with Lincolnshire Police Officer T. Branick during his shift. Here are some highlights and observations:

1. Police Officers are human beings. There are no quotas for speeding tickets or mandates on DUI arrests. They have and use a tremendous amount of discretion when making a traffic stop. They truly and legitimately see it as their mission to keep the village safe. They give subjects the chance to explain their actions, and they believe that, sometimes, a warning is more effective than a traffic ticket.
2. The portable breath test is not admissible in court. It is, on the other hand, probable cause for an arrest. Once the subject is in booking, they are breath tested again. The second test is the one that is official. Also, drunk people are irrational.
3. Going 85 mph down Milwaukee Ave in pursuit of an unruly subject in the Wildfire parking lot was pretty exciting
4. Every singe police transmission made to dispatch or to other officers is taped, and can easily be subpoenaed (read: accountability).
5. Much to my surprise, we did not pull over or arrest any of my students

As Gary T. Marx noted, democratic societies experience a continual tension between the desire for order and the desire for liberty. Both are essential. While one can have the former without the latter, it is not possible to have a society with liberty, which does not also have a minimum degree of order.

And one more note to all of you potential law-breakers out there in the blogasphere- There will be other ride-alongs. Wherever trouble finds itself, we will be there to help.

Just one of those moments...

2007-02-15T20:31:00.000-06:00

On this day in 1933, a missed opportunity in Miami almost changed the world as we know it.

Giuseppe Zangara was a deranged, unemployed bricklayer. A known anarchist, Zangara hatched a plan to assassinate America’s President-elect, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. FDR was in the backseat of his touring car when Zangara fired six rounds in his direction. FDR was uninjured, but the mayor of Chicago, Anton Cermak, was hit in the stomach. The wound would eventually prove itself to be fatal.

As the story goes, Zangara intended to use his .32 caliber pistol that he had bought at a pawnshop to assassinate the man that he blamed for his hunger. Zangara, who was only five feet tall, planned to shoot FDR as his motorcade passed. However, due to Zangara’s size, he was unable get a good look at the President-elect. Zangara decided to stand on a wobbly chair to get a better angle.

Angered by Zangara for blocking her vision, a Miamian named W.F. Cross jostled his chair as he was firing at the motorcade. This made it impossible for Zangara to hit his target.

Had Cross not shook his metal chair, Zangara certainly would have assassinated FDR. The Vice President elect was a man named John Nance Garner (Truman was the VP until 1941). Garner, a Texan, was put on the ticket to balance FDR’s liberalism. Unlike FDR, he was not a firm believer in government regulation of business. Garner was an isolationist when it came to foreign policy, and conservative when it came to social welfare programs. Much like Herbert Hoover, Garner believed that volunteerism was the best way to stimulate the economy after the crash of 1929. In other words, he was the anti-FDR.

According to the newly ratified twentieth amendment, Garner would have become President if Zangara’s bullet hit FDR instead of Cermak. How would Garner have reacted to the Great Depression? How about Pearl Harbor?

Thanks to a women named W.F. Cross, we don’t know the answer to those questions.

Tough men, tough question..

2007-02-13T18:29:00.002-06:00

As General George Washington took the oath of office in April of 1789, the fate of the newly formed United States was unclear. Washington’s popularity has never been matched (he still holds the distinction of being the only President elected unanimously by the electoral college- a feat he accomplished twice). The nation was bitterly divided, in tremendous debt, and was being held together by a remarkably weak Army and no real Navy. Washington had no precedents to follow, no judicial branch, and faced a looming conflict with various Indian tribes.

As Abraham Lincoln took the oath of office on March 4, 1861, America was far from a group of United States. South Carolina had seceded from the union, and, together with six other states, formed what became known to be The Confederate States of America. The nation was falling apart, ideologically and literally. Lincoln’s first executive decision was whether he should re-supply Fort Sumter, located along the Charleston Harbor. Doing so would be seen as an act of war. Avoiding the problem would be seen as granting legitimacy to the states in rebellion.

FDR took office in times of great peril as well. In 1933, the nation was in the heart of the Great Depression. Unemployment was astronomically high. As Banks closed, people lost their life savings, with farmers hit especially hard. In January of that year, a former WWI soldier named Adolf Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany. The very system of democracy and capitalism were at stake, as socialists gained power throughout Europe.

These three men took office during the nations most tumultuous of all times. However, let’s not underestimate the dangers our 44^th president will face upon his or her inauguration in 2009. There are no signs that Iraq is improving, income gaps are at their highest since The Gilded Age, forty-six million Americans are uninsured, and (perhaps most importantly) Iran will be very close to having nuclear capabilities. Needless to say, a nuclear Iran would pose a tremendous, even unprecedented, threat against the US and our allies.

Is there a Washington, Lincoln, or FDR out there?

Do men make history, or does history make men? Which of these four presidents assumed the office at the most dangerous time? You can make a case for all four. Who gets your vote?

Showdown, 2008

2007-02-12T19:17:00.000-06:00

“Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans”

-John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address

“It’s time to turn the page”

- Barack Obama’

Senator Obama’s speech announcing his candidac y was a perfect summation of what would surely be his campaign message-.the merging of Red and Blue America. Drawing on “purple” American values such as liberty, self-reliance, and government accountability, Obama seems genuinely interested and committed to using his experience as a community organizer and reaching out to both sides of the political spectrum. Obama’s message is one of hope. His promise is to reform government by empowering the middle class and reducing the power of special interests. Like Kennedy in the 60’s, Obama is ready to accept the torch for the new generation of post baby boomers.

Patriot of ’76 was at the announcement in chilly Springfield. The most intriguing part of the event had to have been the crowd in attendance. Illinois power brokers such as Lisa and Charles Madigan, Pat Quin, and Alex Gianolous walked through the audience completely unnoticed. Even Senator Dick Durbin had only a few people interested enough to speak with him. This crowd was completely apolitical. They were there for the moment. The few that I spoke with had never even voted. When I asked one man who the current Vice President was, his response was, “the white guy”. These people bared the elements to witness history.

If Obama opens up a political science textbook, he will discover that this demographic rarely votes. Many are unfamiliar with the registration process while others simply lose interest. They were in full force last Saturday, but will they still be as passionate, driven, and well mobilized in eighteen months?

A recent poll indicated that more than half of all surveyed knew very little about Obama, but found him “captivating” and “likeable”. He will be well funded, and has ample name recognition. However, these two traits are not in short supply at the Clinton Camp.

Obama vs. Clinton. Washington outsider vs. the epitome of backroom politics. Dove vs. Hawk.

It’s primary season, and Patriot of 76 wants your prediction.

What would Jefferson do?

2007-02-05T19:40:00.000-06:00

“…that they are endowed by the creator with certain unalienable rights. Among those are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”

With these words, the American experiment was underway. Jefferson’s vision was simple: Any nation that calls itself free must accept the basic principle that rights come from God, not from men. Every person is entitled not just to freedom, but also to the opportunity for prosperity and the ability to live peacefully. These rights are unalienable. They are ours because we are humans.

More than two hundred years have elapsed since the publication of these words. Have we fulfilled the promise of our birth certificate? Would Jefferson be proud of the most prosperous nation in the world?

According to the 2005 U.S. Census Bureau, the number of Americans without health insurance has reached a staggering 46 million people. That is nearly 15 percent of the population. In 2005, the uninsured rate amongst children rose 11.5 percent to more than eight million. Many experts believe that the situation is worsening as children’s health insurance programs in 17 states face federal funding shortfalls totaling an estimated $800 million, equal to the cost of covering more than 500,000 low-income children. Congress has known about the shortfall since last year, when the Administration took note of it and proposed a measure to address it, but Congress has so far failed to act.

This raises an important question: Is health care an unalienable right? Does it fall under Jefferson’s guarantee of “life”? Perhaps the “pursuit of happiness”?

John Edwards certainly thinks so. On Sunday’s Meet the Press program, the Democratic hopeful from North Carolina proposed a 120 billon dollar per year program designed at covering all those that are uninsured.

How does he plan to pay for this program? Higher taxes for the wealthy. Edwards proposed rolling back President Bush’s tax cuts for families earning over two hundred thousand dollars per year.

It’s worth noting that as a First Lady, Hillary Clinton’s proposal of universal health care was seen as a calamitous growth of the federal government. It saddled the Democratic Party with a “raise your taxes” reputation, stunted President Clinton’s power as Chief Legislator, and led to the Gingrich led Republican Revolution/Contract with America in 1994. To say that plan backfired would be an understatement. It failed spectacularly.

Political experts say that in order to win primaries, candidates must appeal to the base. Democrats are mostly middle class Americans who care deeply about social issues such as the health care crisis. In a competitive Democratic field, could Edwards shock the world?

Patriot of 76 has a more overarching question: If all Americans are entitled to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”, are they in turn entitled to health insurance paid for by the richest Americans? If your answer is no, what is your solution to our health care crisis?

Passing the Buck or Defeating Terror?

2007-02-03T23:20:00.000-06:00

In a radio address to the nation, President Bush urged a major reduction in government spending on entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. President Bush threatened with the possibility of major tax increases for future generations and immediate cuts in benefits. All in all, Mr. Bush wants the federal government to spend 70 Billion dollars less on these programs in the next fiscal year.

The President also asked Congress to pass a Line-item veto, which would allow the President to veto certain provisions of a spending bill. The Supreme Court has ruled this unconstitutional during the Clinton administration (Governors are still given this right).

President Bush seems determined to balance the federal budget, just as he promised in his State of the Union address. Fiscal responsibility is a tenet of the Republican Party, and President Bush feels a great responsibility to curb massive government spending (even if it comes at the expense of social programs).

The budget that President Bush is proposing also included 245 billion dollars for the next two years for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Add that to the 400 billion dollars that the wars have cost already.

If generation next is saddled with massive budget deficits, debt, and higher taxes, it won’t be because of entitlement programs. It will be because President Bush has made history by doing the unthinkable: fighting two wars and lowering taxes. The President has said repeatedly that he doesn’t spend time thinking about his legacy. If Iraq continues to cost hundreds of billions of dollars per year, entitlement programs may be sacrificed right when current high school students are looking in the mailbox for their Social Security checks.

Paradigm Shifting to the Left

2007-01-30T18:31:00.000-06:00

A quick glance at the history of political parties in America reveals a very interesting trend. When one party has been in power for a prolonged period of time, and a major disaster occurs for the United States, a paradigm shift occurs. Political power is transferred.

Democrats (previously called Democratic-Republicans, but same basic party ideology) controlled the White House from Jefferson until 1860, when Springfield’s favorite Republican son won the Electoral College despite winning no southern states. Lincoln’s party would be in power until FDR defeated Herbert Hoover during the midst of the Depression. The Democratic stay on top of the mountain would be short lived, as JFK and LBJ help remind the world that America was not invincible. Vietnam was a knockout punch for the Democratic Party, with Nixon’s massacre of McGovern in 1972 as the exclamation point.

Even through Watergate, the Republicans have never looked back (both Carter and Clinton, although both Democrats, were very moderate).

Iraq has been compared to Vietnam numerous times. Is this a valid analogy? The true test will come in November of 2008. If the nation nominates and elects an anti-war Democrat, and the Democrats are able to retain a majority in Congress, perhaps the paradigm shift in this country will begin. This, in turn, could lead to a liberal social agenda that would make Republicans cringle. If Iraq is as disastrous as the pundits will have you believe, it could usher in a new era of Democratic dominance. Iraq could permanently kill the Republican Party.

Protection or Privacy infringement? Look to the 9th!

2007-01-24T19:50:00.000-06:00

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
- The ninth amendment to the U.S. Constitution

In 1965, the U.S. Supreme Court made a sweeping decision that forever changed the way that the government acted in accordance to the American family. Justice William Douglas introduced a new word into the Court’s lexicon: privacy. According to the majority opinion, the defense of privacy was a penumbra, or shadow, of the protections of the Bill of Right. The Court did so by invalidating a Connecticut law that banned the usage of contraceptives, emphasizing how the Court had a responsibility to protect marital and family relationships from government interference without strong justification.

Sally Lieber, a California lawmaker, has proposed a law that would make spanking a child under the age of three years old a crime, punishable by a fine and/or one year in prison. Lieber, who represents the district encompassing San Francisco, believes that corporal punishment victimizes helpless children and contributes to society’s addiction to crime.

Most Californians are skeptical (the proposal polls very poorly in the Golden State). The one thing that people dislike more than Uncle Sam getting involved in their personal lives is when he tells them how to raise their children. In addition, the law would be a nightmare to enforce.

A classic battle is set: Griswold’s legacy of protection of privacy vs. the state’s power to protect the defenseless. Who gets to decide how to punish the children of America? Is the slope a little too slippery for comfort? What’s next, a national bedtime for children under the age of ten?

The debate over the proper role of government in the lives of the citizenry rages on. Patriot of ’76 would love to know where you stand.

What can Daniel Shays teach us about Iraq?

2007-01-20T17:16:00.000-06:00

In 1783, the experiment began. The Revolutionary War had ended with a shocking victory for liberty and self-government over tyranny. Now that the Americans had their own independence, what were they to do with it? The answer was the Articles of Confederation, our nation’s first constitution. The Articles were, essentially, the anti-British government. There was to be no executive branch (too much like King George III), no taxation, and no national army. A tremendous amount of power was given to the individual states.

A few years after the treaty of Paris, our young nation was in severe debt. Each state was responsible for paying its own debt, with Massachusetts owing the most. The state raised taxes to an astronomical level on land, which greatly hurt many farmers. In 1786, Daniel Shays became one of these men.

A former colonial in the Revolutionary War, Daniel Shays now found himself bankrupt and disenfranchised (voting was tied to property ownership back then). In addition, many farmers were faced with the prospect of debtor’s jail if they were unable to repay their original loans. Shays and his fellow farmers made a decision that changed the course of history. After many meetings at Conkey’s Tavern in Pelham, Mass., they decided on insurrection.

Shays and his men were able to seize control of several governmental buildings, even several courthouses, and sustain their rebellion until 1787. Due to lack of funds, Massachusetts was unable to raise a militia to stop Shays. Without a standing army, or the power of taxation to raise one, the federal government could only stand and watch a group of angry farmers as they hijacked the nation for several months. Only after private Boston bankers could raise enough money could a militia be hired to stop Shays and his followers.

Shays rebellion taught the young nation a very powerful lesson. No democracy can survive without two things: Law and Order. When government does not have a monopoly on force, democracies crumble. When militias are able to use terror and violence to gain control of basic governmental institutions such as courts, then “liberty for all” is impossible.

Several weeks ago, President Bush ordered 21,500 troops into Iraq, in order to secure Baghdad from terrorists and militias. Shays Rebellion was the impetus for the U.S. Constitution, which “provides for the common defense” and “insures domestic tranquility”. Will the surge provide law and order in Iraq so that democratic institutions can flourish? Will this new addition of American forces stop all militias and terrorist groups from hijacking the young Iraqi democracy? Your answer to those two questions most likely depends on your feelings on the war and your level of faith in our current administration. However, if the surge does stabilize Iraq, perhaps then we can all agree that history has a funny way of repeating itself.

Finals Time (Govt.)

2006-12-19T14:57:00.000-06:00

"Democracy is the worst form of government...except for the others which have been tried from time to time"
-Churchill

Click here for Chapters 1-3 of the study guide for the final in U.S. Government

Click here for Chapters 5-8 of the study guide for the Final in U.S. Government
*Note: Question 10, the author said that IL. had 23 electoral votes. IL. used to have 23, but now Illinois has 21 electoral votes.

Click here for Chapters 13-14 of the study guide for the Final in U.S. Government

Click here for Chapters 10-12 of the study guide for the Final in U.S. Government

Click here for Chapters 18-20 of the study guide for the Final in U.S. Government

Click here for the "State & Local" section of the study guide for the Final in U.S. Government

Finals Time (US History)

2006-12-13T21:19:00.000-06:00

"History is who we are and why we're here"
- David McCullough

"Peace, plenty, and contentment reign throughout our borders, and our
beloved country presents a sublime moral spectacle to the world..."
- James K. Polk

Click here for Questions 1-40 of the U.S. History Final Review Guide (Thanks to KM, RG, D, JK)

Click here for Questions 41-50

Click here for Questions 51-60

Click here for Questions 61-70

Click here for Questions 71-80

Click here for Questions 81-90

Click here for Questions 91-93 and a map

It's getting a little DRAFTY in here

2006-11-30T21:12:00.000-06:00

After the November midterm elections, Representative Charlie Rangel, who will soon be the chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means committee, offered his own solution of how to handle the war in Iraq. Rangel, a Democratic Congressman from NY, is planning on introducing legislation next month that will bring back the draft for all men and women from ages 18-41.

"If we're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft," Rangel said.

Is Rangel on to something? Few disagree with the assertion that our military is spread very thin. If Iran goes nuclear (which it probably will), and situation in Iraq isn’t settled (which it probably won’t), where else would the U.S. get their troops if we needed to defend ourselves?

Here’s what we do know: The Selective Service System, an agency independent of the Defense Department, keeps an updated registry of men age 18-25 (now about 16 million) from which to supply untrained draftees that would add to our all-volunteer armed forces if needed.

In other words, they know where to find you.

It’s worth examining the history of the draft in this country. The draft was used during the Civil War, both world wars, and between 1948-1973. Both the Civil War and the War in Vietnam, much like the War in Iraq, were incredibly unpopular. During the Civil War, men could avoid the draft by paying a certain dollar amount to the federal government, or by getting someone to serve in his place. In the 1960’s, a man could get out of serving in Vietnam if he was furthering his education. In other words, in these cases, the well-born were able to avoid battlefield.

Rich man’s war, poor man’s fight.

If conscription were brought back, a change would have to be made. College would no longer be an excuse. Stevenson students (Rangel wants both men and women) beware. Uncle Sam may demand your services in the near future.

So is a draft in the best interest of our republic? Patriot of ’76 asked two of Stevenson’s brightest scholars to weigh in on this issue. We got both the liberal and conservative perspective.

We welcome in two first time bloggers. Angry Young Republican vs. CrewU. Well, who do you think came out on top?

----------------

--Angry Young Republican---

Currently, the United states, along with limited support from other allies is fighting a war in Iraq. This war is not against the Iraqi army, or any specific enemy, but something called an insurgency; defined as an insurrection against an existing government, usually one's own, by a group not recognized as having the status of a belligerent.

Our intentions going in to Iraq have shifted from defeating a Tyrant, and discovering weapons of mass destruction. Now we are in Iraq for different reasons. We are trying to keep the region safe, so it does not become a breeding ground for terrorist activities. Along with that, we are installing a democratic government for stability.

No matter if you believe if our cause is noble or not we started this mess, it is on our heads to get out of it. A recent Gallop poll indicates that a whopping 59% of Americans are already sick of Iraq. As reasonable American people we need to find a solution to get us out of Iraq quickly, while making it safe for the future. The Army has missed its recruiting targets since February and last month unexpectedly lowered its benchmark from 8,050 to 6,700 recruits and still only reached 75 percent of that downsized goal. The National Guard and Reserve have suffered a similar 25 percent shortfall. The army is desperate for solders they are now taking Applicants who score in the 10th to 30th percentile range on the military's standardized aptitude test are now being accepted at higher rates. Making matters worse, junior Army leaders are quitting after their enlistment.

With the army having enlistment problems, and the Iraq conflict going downhill, it is now necessary to reinstate the draft. With more troops on the ground, it would be possible to use a tactic called overwhelming force. This would enable us to shut down the insurgency, and give the military the ability to select the most suitable people for combat instead of scraping the bottom of the barrel. On top of that, with more smarter solders, the conflict would end more quickly.

Army captain Phil Carter wrote in the Washington Monthly in March. "It can be the world's superpower, or it can maintain the all-volunteer military, but it probably can't do both."

--CrewU--

There are many reasons why there should not be a military draft. My main problem is it will force people that are against the war to fight and die for cause for which they don’t believe. If someone has a religious or moral objection to shooting someone, I think that it’s unfair for the government to force them to do so.

Another reason is because of the don’t ask, don’t tell law. If a person that was draft went into the recruitment office, and then all they have to do is say out loud that they are gay and then they would not be allowed to go into the military.

The next reason is because of the bill that is going in front of Congress right now has major problems. The bill is stating that there should be a draft for people to serve 2 years over seas for people between the ages of 18-41. There are a couple of problems with this proposal. What happens if a student is in college at the particular point of time? Are people not going to be able to go to college in the off chance that they are going to be called upon? The problem with this is that nobody is going to know when they are going to be called and cannot make any commitments. What are people going to think of the government then? Think about it. A draft will lead to mass protests and a decrease of patriotism.

The last problem with the draft is the medical aspect. A lot of people these days have medical deformities, what is the government going to do with them. Citizens will think that it is unfair that the government is not taking those people into the military. Those people are then going to go have surgery or something to show the government that they are not capable of being medically fit to join the military.

In my opinion the military should be completely voluntary.

----------------------------------------------------

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO THIS DEBATE

Hey Democrats, don't get too excited...

2006-11-25T22:16:00.000-06:00

One day after seizing both houses of congress in the midterm elections, Democrats were given another reason to jump for joy. The much-embattled Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, resigned his position. His replacement, Robert Gates, was named immediately by President Bush (the Senate still must confirm him when they reconvene).

Rumsfeld will always be remembered for being the architect for the war in Iraq. He’s credited (or faulted) for lobbying for preemptive strikes, and for wrongly convincing Congress and the American public that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. He is, after the President and Vice President, the face of this war.

Four years after the official declaration of war, most Republicans will admit that the Defense Department has made countless mistakes in its execution and prosecution. To name just a few, there were too few troops originally deployed, the Iraqi borders were not secured, there was no exit strategy, and the Iraqi Army was dissolved (imagine thousands of unemployed angry young men with weapons). In addition, it seemed as if Rumsfeld and other administration officials were either unaware or unprepared for the post-Saddam insurgency that has claimed far more American lives than the initial fighting.

Knowing these mistakes, Americans cringed every time they heard Rumsfeld say that he had no regrets on the wars prosecution. Rumsfeld’s stubbornness to not change tactics or concede any wrong-doing led scores of Congressman to condemn him and demand his resignation. Many believe that President Bush’s decision not to fire him cost Republicans the midterms.

So isn’t it great news for Democrats that he’s gone? Doesn’t this mean that the President wants to go in a different direction? Possibly a redeployment of troops (Sen. Obama just called for this)? Is this the President’s way of signaling the end of the Bush Doctrine of preemptive war? We all know that the President was not going to resign. By forcing his chief war advisor to do so could mean a new direction. A victory for diplomacy!

Maybe. Or….

As Iran continues to enrich uranium, thus bringing them closer and closer to a nuclear bomb, the White House and the Defense Department are paying very close attention. President Bush and Vice President Cheney have stressed that a nuclear Iran would be a tremendous threat to the Middle East, and to the entire world. Will they sit idly by as Iran joins the “nuclear club?” Will this tough talking President let his successor handle two nuclear members of the axis of evil? If history is any judge, the answer is no.

You have to imagine that in some drawer in some room in the Pentagon (home of the Defense Department) there is a plan to preemptively attack Iran both from the air and on the ground.

If the US decided to attack Iran, most experts predict they would learn from the mistakes of Iraq. In Iraq, Rumsfeld's Defense Department asked for just enough troops to get the job done. If we were to attack Iran, we would need overwhelming force (Patriot of ’76 will discuss the draft later this week). In other words, this would not be a covert action. The Bush administration would need to enlist the support of Congress (the body that officially declares and funds military action), and the American people. This means Congressional hearings, speeches, and intense lobbying by the President and by the Secretary of Defense. Here’s the question: Would Americans really trust Donald Rumsfeld, again?

Perhaps the President asked Rumseld to step down because the former Defense Secretary doesn’t have the one thing the President needs most: credibility. Would we really believe Rumsfeld if he toured the country preaching about preemptive war because of Iranian Weapons of Mass Destruction? Yogi Berra would call that Déjà vu all over again.

If you buy this line of reasoning, then you believe that another preemptive Middle Eastern War is less than two years away.

Here is where Patriot of ’76 will turn it over to you. What does the Rumsfeld resignation mean? Admission of defeat, or preparation for the sequel? A step towards diplomacy, or the first step in the war against Iran?

One thing is for sure- before the Democrats toast to the resignation of the Defense Secretary, it’s worth remembering the President and his advisors understand the political ramifications of every move they make.

Our Democracy’s Hypocrisy? You can bet on it

2006-11-18T23:20:00.000-06:00

In July, moments before the 109th Congress recessed, the House of Representatives signed a bill (317-93) that is the most serious attempt to eliminate online gambling. To make sure that the law would be enforced, the resolution took aim at the institutions that makes online betting work: the credit card companies (the online institutions are all headquartered outside of the US, even though half of their customers are American). You can’t bet online without using the plastic, and credit card companies would be subjected to heavy fines if they allowed their holders to make bets online.

This could be the end of virtual poker games and online sports betting.

As we always do on Patriot of ’76, let’s look at both sides of the argument. Online gambling makes betting your savings away that much easier, which can foster addictions and create major financial problems. It’s terrible that a person can throw their money away in the vain hope of becoming an instant millionaire….

PO76 has a few questions: 1) What hotel do you recommend staying at in Vegas (can’t afford Wynn yet)? 2) What is the little lotto jackpot at right now? 3) What horse or dog track is within driving distance?

It seems like the when the government can regulate (i.e. Tax) a betting institution, it has no problem allowing it to flourish. Does the government ensure that people aren’t addicted to gambling before they’re allowed to buy lotto tickets? Does the government make sure people can afford to lose before letting them double down on elevens at the blackjack table, or by taking “Santa’s little helper” in the fifth?

It seems like in these instances, Americans are given the freedom of how to spend their paychecks. If you take your money to the track or to the craps table, you know there is a substantial chance that you will be making a donation to the “house”. So why can’t you get that same freedom in front of your computer?

According to Christian Capital Advisors, the online gambling industry brings in about twenty billion dollars per year. Remember, all of those institutions are headquartered offshore (mostly Jamaica, United Kingdom, and the Bahamas). If Uncle Sam can’t get a slice of the pie, then nobody can play.

Let’s address the bigger picture. Congressman and Senators believe that gambling is dangerous, and if people can’t gamble online than perhaps they’ll turn their attention elsewhere. How can this line of reasoning work when there are so many other ways for someone to bet that are completely legal?

In 1918, the 18th amendment was ratified, which made the production and consumption of alcohol illegal. Speakeasies and smugglers flourished, and the 21st amendment conceded the fact that enforcement of prohibition was impossible. If online gambling becomes illegal, perhaps our new speakeasies will be our neighbor’s basement, where the buy in is one hundred dollars and the dealer calls the ante.

LOL (learn our language)

2006-11-03T18:55:00.000-06:00

“Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses”
- Statue of Liberty

“Denos su cansado, su pobre, sus masa apiñadas”

- La estatua de la Libertad

“Дайте нам ваш утомленный, ваш голодный, вашим запиханным массам”
- Статуя Свободы

As the House and Senate work out their differences over a controversial immigration bill, the discussion begins anew of who exactly we are as a country. Are we a great American melting pot that our fifth grade social studies teacher (and SchoolHouse Rock) promised? A Sunday afternoon drive through Chicago can take you to Chinatown, little Italy, and Greektown. These neighborhoods are relics from the great era of Eurasian immigration, and some at Stevenson owe their Americanism to Lady Liberty for opening up the gate at Ellis Island.

U.S. History class taught us that massive immigration led to increased nationalism. Immigrants found the streets paved with flag waiving citizens. In 2006, a great number of Americans (including a majority of House Republicans) want immigration to come with one simple caveat: LOL. Learn Our Language.

English as the national language. Should the U.S. scrap the watered down resolution of “English as the unifying language” and make the mastery of the English language an absolute in order to gain citizenship? If so, the government would be under no obligation to provide alternative languages whatsoever. Street signs, job applications (the government is the largest employer in the nation), schools. English. English. English.

Every so often, Patriot of ’76 turns the blog over to two students. The process is simple. They write their opinions, answer some difficult questions, and you tell me what you think. Patriot of '76 isn't here to take sides, but you are. Who do you agree with, and why? Do you have any arguments on this issue that hasn’t been made?

Blogging today against English as the official language is Wonderwomen. Blue Raja disagrees with her. Here are their reasons
______________________
Wonderwoman

There are many reasons that I strongly disagree with English becoming a mandatory learned language in the United States. To begin with, the concept and the reason why America is so unique and wonderful are because it incorporates a variety of cultures and traditions. Language is a crucial part of those cultures and by taking it away, we would essentially be taking away makes our country so special. What difference does it make to a businessman in Buffalo Grove, whether or not a Hispanic Immigrant can speak English–it doesn’t! Most people that still speak their native language only interact with those who do, so it really doesn’t affect those speaking English. If anything, it just enriches our country’s culture.

A second issue raised is how does the government accommodate those that learn differently or just cannot seem to learn a language period? I have learned in Sociology that once past a certain age, I believe it’s late teens; it is almost impossible to learn a language. So, would you just only allow citizens to fewer than eighteen? But once again, it all relates back to the question of what does it matter- why would it even be relevant to the rest of our country if immigrants know English. As the world is essentially become smaller, what would it hurt to preserve the beauty of culture and language? With a McDonalds on every corner in about every country, you can’t deny that the true identity of these societies is being gradually diminished.

Blue Raja

If people want become American citizens, they should have to learn the language of the country. Making English the national language would also create more jobs and opportunities for immigrants. People always argue that immigrants, Mexicans in particularly, have awful jobs and hardly make any money. Making them learn English will increase their chances of economic prosperity. As President Bush said, “If you learn English, and you're a hard worker, and you have a dream, you have the capacity from going from picking crops to owning the store, or from sweeping office floors to being an office
manager”. The opposition may argue that America is a free country,
and we are the melting pot of the world. America is a free country, and I have nothing against immigrants bringing in their different cultures, but if they want to interact and step-up in America, they have to learn the language and not expect us to learn theirs. It’s our country and our language should be spoken. What unifies a country? Culture. What is culture made up of? Communication. Language. What represents a country? The people and language they speak in it. This is AMERICA, not Mexico, not France, not China, but AMERICA, where ENGLISH is spoken, not Spanish, not French, not Chinese, but ENGLISH.
__________

CLICK BELOW FOR THE AUDIO DEBATE!

English as the National Language?.

Party like it's 1798

2006-11-02T21:55:00.000-06:00

Americans were sick and tired in 1798. The Federalist Party controlled both Houses of Congress, and the newly built White House on Pennsylvania Avenue. President John Adams pushed Congress to pass the Alien and Sedition laws, which was a flagrant contradiction to the First Amendment (Freedom of speech, press, assembly). The laws also made life miserable for immigrants, increasing the requirements and wait time for citizenship. Immigrants could be deported at any time without due process. The Federalists used fear of French infiltration, who was the enemy du jour, as justification for their actions.

Americans began to wonder, does the mere threat of attack warrant such a betrayal of the Spirit of 76? Didn’t our brothers and fathers die at Bunker Hill and Yorktown so we could have the ability to criticize our government? Didn’t our leaders pen a document in Philadelphia that embraced cultural diversity?

Democratic-Republicans, led by Vice President Thomas Jefferson, were up in arms. They traveled around the country, demanding an end to Federalist domination.

A vote for Democratic-Republicans is a vote for civil liberties! A vote for Democratic- Republicans is a vote for cultural freedom!

Listen to any current Democrat from Bill Clinton to John Kerry to Dan Seals. You’ll hear the same arguments.

The Federalist hit back. The Democratic Republicans are soft on national security! They can’t keep America safe! The Democratic-Republicans are weak on immigration!

Listen to any current Republican from President Bush to Vice President Cheney to Arnold Schwarzenegger. You’ll hear the same argument

Can you really tell me with a straight face that history doesn’t repeat itself?

Oh by the way, the Democratic-Republicans were unable to take Congress in 1798, although they came close. However, two years later, Thomas Jefferson began the era of Democratic-Republican domination by taking the White House while many loyal Congressmen rode his coattails. Soon thereafter, the Federalist Party disappeared.

This is good news to current Democrats if they can’t take Congress on Tuesday. The only question is, do they have a Thomas Jefferson in their ranks for 2008?