New Airport Security

Well we have defiantly made some new advancements in security and we can see that through the new airport security we have set up. It's a full body scanner that lets officials see underneath your clothes without patting you down or even touching you. In our lifetime, there has been some crazy terrorist activities and now a days, someone would probably try to hide a bomb in their underwear if they could. Some people say this is most defiantly an invasion of privacy, i mean it is. Airport security gets to see you completely naked. TSA said that the scanners do not see body cavities they just reveal any metallic and nonmetallic objects between your body and your clothes. I think that this is an invasion of our privacy. But, again, I believe it is alright since the government is doing everything they can to keep us safe. What if they didn't do the full body scanners and someone was hiding a bomb in their underwear, and a whole plane full of people died. But now, with the scanners, we can make sure that doesn't happen. I believe this is a great idea. Just another way to keep our country as safe as we can.

Medical Marijuana: legal in Arizona

Many states have already passed laws for medical marijuana to be acceptable. Arizona is the newest addition. I find it very funny that the federal government is against the usage of marijuana in general, yet state after state is making it legal for medical purposes. Although prop 19 in California did not pass, I do believe the issue will come up again and we will soon revote for it. I do believe it will pass one day and i think that once California passes it, other states will follow, just like the issue with the medical marijuana. California was the first state to legalize it for medical purposes and after that, other states followed. Again, i find it very funny that all of this most likely will end up happening and yet the federal government is still against it. Thoughts?

Warrantless Wiretapping

Warrantless wiretapping is the monitoring of your phone calls by the government without a warrant. I believe that it is helpful that the government does this, warrant or not. Some people believe that it is an invasion of your privacy, which in ways it is, but it is also keeping our country safe. The only reason the government is doing this is to prevent terrorists threats. They are not sitting in and just listening to the conversation you are your friend is having about cars. I think it is extremely helpful. Yes, it would be nice if they had a warrant, but since they don't I believe it is still fine. However, when it reaches a point where the government is using it to just listen in on conversations and not for official use, that's when it becomes a problem and an invasion of our rights. Or even if the government is not using it and just a third party is using it, that is an invasion of our privacy and that also crosses the line of our rights.

Stephen Colbert testifies before Congress

Some people are thinking that Stephen Colbert's appearance before Congress was inappropriate, but if they were the ones that invites him, they knew what they were getting themselves into. They know who he is and they know what he does and how funny he is when he talks about the news. I feel that if they didn't want that humor that he brought, they wouldn't have invited him since they know what he brings to the table wherever he goes. Yes, it was a little bit inappropriate, but I don't think it's something to worry about. The Congress invited him, so they knew what was going to happen.

2010 Meg Whitman vs. Jerry Brown

Well that was an interesting debate. It seemed as if Brown never fully answered any of the questions, where as Whitman seemed more collected and actually answered the questions without hesitation. If you notice, Brown lost his train of thought a couple of times and seemed almost unprofessional at times. As Levin said, he seemed like a crazy old man, which he did. His thoughts were all mixed up and in my view, he didn't seem like he could handle it. I know he was governor once, a long time ago, but why is he running again? Whitman seemed like she knew what she was talking about and the points she was making were very strong and though out. No matter how awkward her facial expressions were, she delivered her speech very well. She also made very good rebuttals and points against Brown. I think she seems like a better governor since she made strong points that seems like she can actually follow through with and overall seemed more calm and collected. Do we want a governor who doesn't fully answer the questions and looses their train of thought? Or do we want someone who can handle the hardships they are faced with?

Pg 84

The reason my political views are the way that they are, are because of my family. My dad's views have rubbed off on me because of the fact that he states them so openly and a lot of what he is saying, i agree with. So most of his views and opinions i agree with since he's always stating them and making good points that make them convincing and want to believe it. He also looks at the other side of the views and shows how it's flawed to make his view more believable. So,my party affiliation is the same as my father's since his ideas about it appeal to me.

Voting

I think that the voting age should never be lowered to anything less than 18. If anything, I feel like they should raise the age. Some people, even at 18, haven't matured yet and they don't know what they want, or what they are doing. Some vote based off of silly things and not the actual facts. I'm not saying all voters do this, but some do and if it were possible, i feel as if the voting age should be raised.