Bill in Congress

There is a bill currently in Congress that will change the Internet as we know it. Known as the Stop Online Piracy Act, it would grant corporations powers over copyrighted material they did not previously have. The bill would make it a felon to upload and post copyrighted clips. Where as previously corporations would send a letter to the company hosting the material and they would take it down, the bill would give them the power to request that the entire site be taken down. If it's not taken down, they can take the company to court.



I am against this bill with every fiber of my being. The Internet is a land of freedom, and should not be regulated. It is also the responsibility of the coperations to protect their own material. My tax dollars do not go toward the locks on jewelry shops, so it should not go to protect virtual goods as well. This is a truly draconian bill that is being passed.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/16/sopa-internet-censorship-online-piracy-house-hearing_n_1098255.html

Democrats

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-morgan/obama-must-explain-his-br_b_1020910.html

Obama's administration has presided over many attacks over marijuana politically, from various branches of the government. This is very problematical for voters because Obama had sworn to respect states laws regarding marijuana. One thing that has happened is that Federal prosecutors are threatening to arrest state employees for administering, medical marijuana even if its states law, which just harms the patient. Additionally the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms said that medical marijuana patients may not purchase firearms. The American people want to end the war on marijuana but the government keeps refusing.

In my opinion this is an awful thing that Obama is letting happen. He swore to do something and is now doing the exact opposite. How can anyone trust him again if he so easily goes against his word? Additionally these acts against medical marijuana users don't make any sense. Why don't medical marijuana patients have the right to defend themselves? This whole thing is disgraceful.

Republicans

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/26/nation/la-na-bachmann-20110626

Michele Bachmann is a Republican candidate from Minnesota. She is very strong on her stance against government aid. Despite this, her husband received $30,000 in aid for the counseling clinic he runs. Additionally the farm in Wisconsin that Bachmann is a partner of, got $260,000 from the government. She calls things like Obama's stimulus programs roots of Washington's "spending addiction."


I am very much against what Bachmann is doing. She is practicing hypocrisy in a form so pure that its a almost revolting. Bachmann is demonizing something that she capitalizes on. I hate how often this goes on in politics in general, not just with Republicans. I really hope the GOP comes to its senses and stop supporting this hypocrite.

Bill of Rights

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/27/nation/la-na-court-guns-20110827

On August 27th, 2011 the Supreme Court overturned handgun bans in Washington and Chicago. Other judges have been interpreting the 2nd amendment to mean people can only keep firearms in their homes. The National Rifle Association is asking the Supreme Court to change these rulings because they feel that the 2nd Amendment extends beyond the home. Hundreds of lawsuits have been filed against courts in places like California that have regulated gun usage outside the home. Judges in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts and New York have claimed that there is no constitutional right at all to carry a loaded gun for self-defense.


I personally believe everyone does indeed have the right to carry a very small gun on them for protection. If we outlaw guns then only the criminals have them. Places that have very low crime rates, such as Sweden and Switzerland, have very lax gun laws. People need to be able to quickly and efficiently protect themselves. That said, guns definitely need to be regulated and there needs to be psychological exams tied with getting one.

Constitutionality 2

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/16/opinion/la-oe-kleiman-marijuna-legalization-20100714

On July 16, 2010 California legalized medical marijuana. Why not just make it fully legal when all you need to do to get a medical marijuana card is to claim you are sleepy? Because California couldn't tax it because it goes against federal law. But if Proposition 19 passed in California, the proposition that legalizes cannabis, it would benefit the rest of the hemp related industries.


I believe that legalizing marijuana on a federal level would benefit everyone. It would drastically reduce the power of black market dealers. Additionally European advocates tend to classify marijuana as a "soft" drug, which is something I would agree with from what I have researched on the topic. Also the hemp could greatly benefit other industries such as paper and rope.

CONSTITUTIONALITY

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/25/nyregion/gay-marriage-approved-by-new-york-senate.html?pagewanted=all

Gay marriage was made legal in New York on June 24, 2011. It was voted in by a vote of 33 to 29, with all democrats but one voting for it, and all but 4 republicans voting against it. Senator Mark J. Grisanti issued an apology to all those that weren't previously allowed to marry. Just a year before this passing Governor Andrew M. Cuomo had started organizing local gay rights activists. Local Bishops, however oppose the new ruling.

I believe that it is great that New York made gay marriage legal. I also find it so surprising that it was passed in a Republican controlled government, when it was so easily rejected a few years ago when the Democrats were in control. The way the Bishops reacted was a bit childish, in they think just because someone else is getting married it ruins it for them. Marriage is just such an outdated concept that it shouldn't be this big of an issue.

Creating Government

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/world/middleeast/16egypt.html

Egypt is in the midst of creating a new government after its last, suppressive one fell. One major factor in their new government is the matter of a nation security agency. The last one was disbanded after evidence was found that they tortured prisoners. Additionally the military branch of the government is going to hold a meeting "that will speed legislative and presidential elections this year." Lastly, the the new security reform has backing from Hilary Clinton.


In my opinion the security reform is much needed. But it will only work if the new government is entirely transparent with how they run it. The people of Egypt will be very attentive to whatever new governing body forms. Additionally American backing of said government might not be the best thing. I think America needs to stop getting ourselves involved with other countries, especially the middle east.