Chapter six

1. Polls:  http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/pollingcenter/
Is American news media too dependent upon polls?  Is it appropriate for news agencies to create polls and then report on them?  Why or why not?

I think the journalism industry has become a little too reliant on polls. What ever happen to good old fashioned journalism where you get out there and ask people their opinions face to face? The news industry is not what it used to be. It is ok for them to use polls and report on them because it is not really hurting anyone, I just think they should not rely on them as much as they do.

2. How important is political party identification to you (e.g. as a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, etc.)?  Was it more or less important to your parents & grandparents?  Does it seem more or less important to your friends?  Why or why not?

Political party identification is not the important to me I choose who I vote for on whether I agree with them at the time I do not let labels like parties get in the way. My parents and grandparents had the same reasoning about political parties so I guess they had some influence on me. I do have friends that think its important because they see it as certain political parties care about certain issues and that's what they care about too. I obviously do not agree so to each their own.

3. Do you feel that you opinion of politics is more influenced by economic issues or by social issues?  Why?

When it comes to social and economic issues I equally care about both because both are important, both effect someone somewhere in  the U.S. so that makes it important. There are some issues on both sides that I think are a waste of time, but I think everyone feels that way about some things.

I commented on:

chapter five blog

1. The issue of race - does the government do too little or too much to reduce the instances of racial discrimination?  Why or how so?
2. The issue of gender - same question as #1.
3. The issue of sexual orientation - same question as #1 and #2.


I believe most of the racial discrimination has been resolved ,and that even though instances may happen today the government is usually very quick to jump on it because of the laws and amendments that are now in place. I believe this is only the case with some races though. The obvious recent racial discrimination fault of the U.S. government would against people of muslim and middle eastern descent since 9/11 or even since the earlier attempted terrorist attacks SOME of the general population have issues with these people and I think when the government rounded up 5,000 muslims living in America around that time it was more of them trying to look like they were doing something to satisfy those people. The racial profiling that police officers use may still be a problem though for obvious reasons not all Mexicans are here illegally, not all black people are gang bangers, not all white people are saints, and not all muslims are terrorists and I feel like sometimes that's what it comes down to when profiling is used.

I feel the same way with gender equality I believe that most of the government does good to not discriminate and to prevent discrimination. Does it still happen? yes, but for the clear fact that not everyone follows the rules and not everyone speaks up when they've been wronged simple as that.

Sexual Orientation is a different story. I believe that the government does not do enough to prevent instances of discrimination of this category. While no cases come to mind I'm sure that there have been issues recently of a gay or lesbian person being discriminated against in the workplace or other place where the government could do something about it, but they haven't. I think that there should be more laws in place against the discrimination against gays/lesbians just for the simple fact that they are human beings too and they have lives and work just like everyone else does. Sure, it's the states right to say if they want to legalize marriage or civil unions (which I think is the equivalent to black people having separate fountains, but that's just my opinion), but I think it should be a national government decision instead.

commented on:
Melissa Ray
Ashley Pelfrey

chapter four

1. Freedom of Speech:  How important is it?  Does the freedom go "too far"?  What areas of speech should not be protected?
I believe freedom of speech is important because if you cannot speak freely then your voice isn't heard and this wouldn't be a democracy. I think people take the freedom too far in using it as a defense to be disrespectful and say whatever they want to the freedom itself, and the way it is written is just fine. I don't think the freedom of speech should be able to be used as a way to protect ones self from being a nuisance at such events as peaceful protests etc. because then they just ruin it for everyone.

2. Freedom of Religion:  Is separation of church and state necessary?  Why or why not?
The separation of church and state is necessary just for the fact that not everyone has the same religion and if one religion ruled over the whole nation then it wouldn't be fair to the other religions. It would seem more like a communism because other people would be made to live by how that one religion says you should live instead of us being able to do our own thing.


3. Criminal Procedure:  Are defendant's rights crucial to our system of government?  Why or why not?  Many argue that defendants have too many rights - do you agree?  Why or why not?
I think the defendant's rights in our country are crucial because not everyone is guilty and i think the amount of rights they have are just fine because when it ultimately comes down to it ,its the jury and judge's responsibility to correctly prosecute those who are guilty.
commented on: Gabrielle Miller, Melissa Ray, chelsea dunn

Chapter three Q&A

1. Is a strong national government necessary or should the state governments have an equal share of power? Why?

The states should have equal power because in turn the people may have more power. When the government has more power the possibility of power being shifted solely to the governement, to a certain part of the government, or a certain person in the government is more possible.


 2. National power increased during the Great Depression but then power began to shift back to the states (somewhat) during the Reagan administration? Why did that happen and is that shift appropriate?

Reagan supported New Federalism and believed the government was not the solution to any problems in the nation so he made some cuts and change to give the states some more power. I believe teh shift was appropriate because obviously the government being more in charge wasn't working so it was time to try a new approach.

3. Education stirs much discussion relating to the issue of federalism. Should the national government regulate education or is it a matter best left to state and local governments? Why?

The federal government should have a small say in it, but most of it should be left to state and local governments because each area and state has different needs when it comes to education, for example a school in clinton,TN isn't going to have the issues and needs as a school in Los Angeles, California. So for the federal government to control it all wouldn't be as successful because they may look at it as all areas and schools are the same.

commented on: Melissa Ray
Ashley Pelffrey
Chelsea Dunn