5 Former Presidents Make Appearance at Concert to Raise Funds for Hurricane Victims

Link to Article: http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/living-presidents-attend-texas-hurricane-relief-concert-50630060

On Saturday, the 5 former U.S. presidents came together at a concert in Texas to raise funds for victims of the tragic hurricanes. Despite battling Parkinson’s disease and having to rely on a wheelchair, at age 93 Mr. Bush attended the concert, showing his support and sympathy towards those affected. According to George H.W. Bush’s spokesman, the president's’ raised $31 million.

When the former presidents had the opportunity to speak, not one of them made any comments regarding Donald Trump or any other political issue. All politics aside, these 5 men simply came together in efforts to unite the country and reveal that, “the heart of America… is greater than our problems” (Hillary Clinton).

Overall, there seems to be a sharp distinction between how former presidents dealt with national tragedies versus how Trump has been handling the issues recently. Is Trump doing a good-enough job dealing with such issues? What are your reactions to the 5 former president's actions?

How Fiction Becomes Fact on Social Media

Article

Recently, rumors and conspiracies have been spreading like wildfire over the internet. There’s no shortage of these, whether it be that Russia hacked into Twitter and Facebook to sway voters, or that the Las Vegas shooter was an “antifa” supporter. Even if we believe we won’t fall prey to misinformation from online sources, particularly social media, studies have shown that users of sites like Facebook will still absorb the information. These falsities then are able to spread and grow over the internet, and can distort information even further through an effect similar to the game “telephone.” Some people seem to find it easier to believe something if they’ve seen it multiple times, even if the source of the information is unreliable. This is seen through the usage of memes, another way false information can be spread, and then taken as fact. Once people see something online that they may want to be a part of a discussion on, they share it without checking if it’s from a reliable source.

This article strongly relates to the social media lessons we covered. In class, we learned that social media makes it easier in elections to spread misinformation and gain notoriety. This article explains how this spread of misinformation can happen. While there are certainly some benefits to the growing use of social media, this is one of the most negative aspects of it.

The increase in amount of falsities in the media is alarming. Do you think combating the sending of false information is a realistic goal?

How do you think we could prevent the spread of wrong information?

Do you think social media has a place in politics? If so, what should it be?

Former presidents lead Texas concert for hurricane relief

Link to Article

Photo by AP Photo/LM Otero

This evening, all former presidents who are still living gathered to support hurricane relief efforts at a concert in Texas. Four of the five men- Obama, George W. Bush, Carter and Clinton- also delivered short statements about the necessity of unity in the country during times of hardship. President Trump did not make an appearance at the event, but made a video where he shared his sympathies regarding the natural disasters.
Former presidents George H.W. Bush and Clinton have been known to attend and aid charity events in the past to help raise funds for natural disasters. Trump, however, has a track record of criticizing Puerto Rican leadership when they were struggling to ensure citizen safety and health following the catastrophe. When the hurricanes were at their peak destruction, many complained about the president speaking out against Puerto Rico and tweeting from the comfort of the golf course, rather than taking action to provide help. Trump's lack of empathy towards those in need and the idea that former presidents step in more than him, can be interpreted as careless. It is quite possible that Trump could not attend the concert this evening due to his duties, however, it is also not unreasonable to conclude, based upon his actions in the past few months, that he was not there for self-involved reasons.
Regardless of whether you support Trump or not, do you find his leadership skills to be adequate or could they be improved? If so, how?

Attached are some Gallup polls reflecting nationwide opinion on Trump's leadership in 2016 and 2017. In the second poll, there is a clear divide between Republicans and Democrats regarding whether or not people believe that he "cares about individuals." Only 2% of Democrats participating in the poll rate this ability as a 4 or 5 on a 1-5 scale, compared to 64% of Republicans. This data emphasizes the drastic polarization in today's politics, as mentioned by the author of The Atlantic reading.

Ted Cruz, Who Is "Not the Zodiac Killer", Embraces the Meme

On Wednesday morning, Senator Ben Sasse tweeted a Lee Harvey Oswald comment as a nod to Trump's past claim that Senator Ted Cruz was the son of President JFK's killer. Cruz responded with an infamous cryptic note by the Zodiac Killer himself, breaking his silence on the long running meme. 

Although the evidence doesn't prove that it's almost impossible that Senator Cruz is the Zodiac Killer (for example, the Killer's last murder was on 1969 and Cruz was born on 1970), it still doesn't prevent people from creating jokes about it. The creation of the years-long meme has been dated back to 2013, but began to gain popularity during the 2016 Presidential Primaries. A poll conducted by Public Policy Polling on February 2016 asked Florida Republicans if he was the Zodiac Killer, along with general election-related questions, and concluded that 10% believe that they thought the Senator was the infamous murderer while 28% were not sure. Even Cruz's wife, Heidi, was asked about the issue and denied that his husband had any connection with the Killer. 

In 2017, the meme hasn't been as mainstream as it was last year, however, the public was soon reminded of it thanks to Cruz's tweet. The tweet, however, garnered mixed reactions from Twitter. Some praised Cruz for having a good sense of humor about a truly strange joke, while others believe that the meme is dead and it's time to move on. 

In my opinion, I think that it's pretty cool of Cruz to bring some comedy from the political world to the public. Even though it's not really common for serious politicians to make jokes, it's still nice to know that it's possible for them to acknowledge memes especially during a time of political polarization. 

Do you agree with those who praise Cruz for acknowledging the meme or do you believe that it wasn't necessary for a politician like him to recognize the joke? Why or why not? 

NY Times Article
Picture Link
See the original tweet here

Richard Spencer Supporters Shoot at Protesters

Main Article
Alternate Article

Image

Today, three Richard Spencer supporters were charged with attempted homicide in Gainesville, Florida. The men pulled over and began confronting a group of protesters, “making Nazi salutes and shouting chants about Hitler” (Svrluga). When a protester hit the men’s car with a baton, the men pulled over and opened fire on the protesters. The men fled (though they threatened the protesters that they were going to kill them) and a protester got the license plate of their car.

The shooter, Tenbrink, was also involved with Charolettesville at the “Unite the Right” rally which turned violent. The police tracked down the men and Tenbrik admitted to the shooting attempt. The three men were charged with attempted murder.

Do you think that the white nationalist views of the alt-right is causing these people to normalize literal nazism or have these people felt this way and use the alt-right as a way to express these views?

Senators grappling with how to regulate online advertising in the wake of the 2016 election

Article Link


Al Drago, the New York Times

With Facebook and Google attracting 85% of all digital political advertising, the Senate is trying to figure out how to regulate the content and source of these ads. Russian companies anonymously purchased at least $100,000 of ads on Facebook, where more than half of American adults now get their news. Given that the Trump campaign spent $85 million on its Facebook strategy, which designed numerous iterations of targeted advertising to prospective voters and that Federal election laws prevents foreign influence in elections through advertising, government regulatory intervention will be necessary to protect the integrity of future elections. The Klobuchar-Warner-McCain bill calls for greater transparency and accountability for online political advertising.

Discussion Questions:
1. Will it be enough to know the source of online political advertising and how do you believe content could be regulated?
2. Do you believe companies like Facebook, Google, and Youtube need to do more to patrol the political advertising on their websites or is this the government's responsibility?
3. How can the integrity of next year's midterm election and the 2020 presidential election be better protected given all of the meddling and false information that plagued the 2016 election?

Former President George Bush Breaks Silence on Trump

Main Article

Video of Speech

Transcript of Speech

Image Link

This afternoon, former President George W. Bush gave a speech in New York City at the George W. Bush Institute and began his speech by expressing joy that “friends of ours from Afghanistan, China, North Korea and Venezuela are here… these are people who’ve experienced the absence of freedom and they know there’s a better alternative than tyranny.” He went on to say that “the great democracy has faced new and serious threats.”

Though President Bush does not state Trump’s name in his speech, many of Trump’s policies and much of Trump’s rhetoric is criticized. Bush says that “too often we judge other groups by their worst examples” and that “nationalism has turned into nativism,” which can easily be tied to Trump’s jaw-dropping statement about Mexicans in June of 2015 (the video at the top of this article is a fun flip flop here). Bush also says that “We cannot wish globalization away,” which also could be targeted at Trump, who threatened to withdraw NAFTA if Canada and Mexico refuse to renegotiate. Bush again returns to the increased tension between races, and states, “Bigotry or white supremacy in any form is blasphemy against the American creed,” which again could be targeting Trump, who has said that laziness is a trait in black people and said that the majority of Mexican immigrants are rapists.

This speech connects very closely to the “How American Politics Went Insane” by Jonathan Rauch. Bush reflects on the inefficiency of the government and states, “In recent decades, public confidence in our institutions has declined. Our governing class has often been paralyzed in the face of obvious and pressing needs.” This paralysis could be due to the weakening of parties or middlemen as a result of voters distrusting the system as Rauch claims, though Bush states, “We know that when we lose sight of our ideals, it is not democracy that has failed. It is those charged with preserving and protecting democracy.” Those “charged with preserving and protecting democracy” undoubtedly includes the administration and legislatores. Bush’s reflection also agrees with Rauch’s when he states “discontent deepened and sharpened partisan conflicts… Our politics seems more vulnerable to conspiracy theories and fabrication.”

The polarization which both Bush and Rauch refer to has “paralyzed” the government by weakening the ability to compromise and has also caused people to believe facts from their party which makes us “more vulnerable to conspiracy theories and fabrication.”

Other articles: http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/without-mentioning-trump-george-w-bush-rebukes-trumpism/

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/analysis-george-bush-takes-trump-mentioning/story?id=50591447

How has Trump impacted people’s views and perceptions of Republicans?

Has Trump changed what it means to be Republican? If so, how?

8-year-old child with Disabilities Handcuffed by Officer Sumner

Link to Article: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/handcuffs-little-kids-unconstitutional_us_59e127fce4b0a52aca1809ad

Link to video (warning: painful to watch): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72vu6nxZX58

This past week, a video of a 3rd grader with disabilities being handcuffed has gone viral through social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter. The video captures the child crying out and stating that he is in pain. The officer ignores his pleas and refuses to unhand-cuff the child and continues to tell the boy that he “must suffer the consequences” when he misbehaves.

When questioned, Officer Sumner attempted to justify his actions by explaining that the 54lb boy swung at the officer with his elbows (...maybe because the child has ADHD?). Ultimately, when the case was taken to court the judge found the entire situation extremely disturbing and ruled the officer’s actions as unconstitutional for it violated the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Social media site users are furious with the officer’s actions and many argue that this is an abuse of power, as well as claiming this to be torture. What is your reaction to this? Did the officer handle the situation appropriately or are there other ways he could have gone about it?

Richard Spencer speech at Florida campus sparks mass protest

Article Link: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41683713

Getty Images

On Thursday, October 19, Richard Spencer delivered a hateful speech at a university in Gainesville, Florida. Although Spencer denied being a white supremacist, he is known for conveying pro-Nazi and racist beliefs. Students and citizens gathered outside of the event and protested, telling Spencer that "Nazis are not welcome here." The university did not condone Spencer speaking but by law and his right to freedom of speech, they were required to give permission. The massive protests resulted in Florida's governor declaring a state of emergency and police were on standby, though the opposing sides were mostly peaceful.

As aforementioned, the university did not have much of a say in the matter because of laws protecting rights to the first amendment, even though they knew it would cause immense controversy. Do you think this is ethical? Should the university be allowed to deny speakers they disagree with, or is it important to uphold constitutionality in this situation? Why or why not?

Edit: Later news revealed that supporters of Spencer were violent and shot at protesters.

Only 5% of Santa Cruz Fire Contained

Link to Article: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Homes-evacuated-in-Santa-Cruz-Mountains-as-new-12283892.php

On Tuesday, October 17, a wildfire broke out in the Santa Cruz mountains and forced those near the Boulder Creek area to evacuate immediately. Over 600 firefighters attempted to contain the fires but unfortunately, at least 5 were injured. The fire went so far as to reach the southwest of San Jose. Additionally, according to SFGATE, only 5% of the fire was able to be contained.

The NorCal fires have been intensifying for a couple of weeks now and the issue continues to persist. While the wildfires are taking place mainly in Sonoma and Napa, as well as some SoCal locations, they're seemingly getting closer and closer to the center of the bay area. One of Santa Cruz residents says that while he was aware of the fires, he never imagined he would be in a situation where he had to evacuate his home because of them.

This seems to be the case for many of us, we don’t take direct action until we are being threatened by such issues. Therefore, what can we do in order to prevent or be prepared for emergencies like these? How can we help those who have been impacted by such tragedies? Is enough being done?

Security Officers Fired for United Airlines Dragging Episode

Two of the four officers involved in the United Airlines controversy back in April—in which a passenger named David Dao was forcibly dragged from his seat and out of the flight when refusing to give up his seat—have been fired by the Chicago Department of Aviation after an investigation, while the other two officers remain suspended. The investigation concluded that the four officers "mishandled a nonthreatening situation that resulted in a physically violent and forceful removal of a passenger." The report also included the fact that "the employees made misleading statements and deliberately removed material facts from their reports."

In case you forgot about the incident, on April 9, 2017, a United Airlines flight to Louisville, Kentucky was overbooked and the flight crew offered $800 credit for any volunteer to give up their seat, the crew resorted to using a process that would determine a passenger who either had paid the lowest fares, checked in the latest, or were not part of a connecting flight, to be removed. Dr. David Dao was the unfortunate passenger who was chosen to be removed, but when he refused to give up his seat, the airport's security stepped in and forcefully removed him from his seat, sustaining multiple injuries in the process. After threatening to sue the company, United paid him a confidential amount of money as compensation.

In reaction to the firing, Dao's lawyer has stated that his client saw it as unfortunate that the officers lost their job, but reacted positively to United's new policies. The airline company rolled out a new policy that raised the maximum amount of credit given to volunteers who give up their seats to $10,000 from $1,350 as well as creating additional methods of making sure flights won't be overbooked again. Chicago's Aviation Department also issued a new rule that would only send officers into planes for disturbances at the request of the Chicago Police Department.

I believe that firing the officers will not impose peace nor any feelings of safety among the people since this action was only done in Chicago and not in other US cities. This action was done way too late in my opinion because I don't get the reason why an investigation was needed in the first place when the evidence of brutality is seen in the videos online.

Do you believe that justice came a little too late for the officers? Should all of the officers be fired? Do you also believe that United Airlines or Chicago's new policies will change anything?

NY Times Article

Queen B and J Balvin Collab in Support of Puerto Rico and Mexico

Link to Article: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/beyonce-remixes-mi-gente-for-hurricane-and-earthquake-relief-jbalvin-mexico-puerto-rico/

Link to Song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APHgDFRpCi0

On September 28, J Balvin's hit single "Mi Gente" featuring Beyonce was released. Through Instagram, Beyonce announced: "I am donating my proceeds from this song to hurricane relief charities for Puerto Rico, Mexico and the other affected Caribbean islands...".

During the midst of September, Puerto Rico was severely affected and devastated by Hurricane Maria. It left nearly 4 million Americans without power on the island, killed and destroyed the homes of hundreds, and up to this day, the Caribbean island continues to struggle getting back on its feet. Mexico faced similar devastation after being hit by two major earthquakes within a two week range. Over 400 individuals were killed as a result of the destruction caused by the earthquake. Aware that both Puerto Rico and Mexico were in desperate need of aid and support, Beyonce and Latin artist, J Balvin, collaborated to support both locations with financial assistance.

On October 3rd, Trump visited the Island and belittled the damage caused by Hurricane Maria, suggesting that it was “not a real catastrophe” when compared to Hurricane Katrina. He continued to show merciless behavior when tossing supplies to the people as if it were a lottery game, and blamed Puerto Rico for being a financial burden to the nation.

Thoughts on Trump’s attitude and behavior towards Puerto Rico?

Is the government doing enough to support countries in times of need (such as Puerto Rico)?

Reaction to Beyonce’s actions? Is she handling the situation better than Trump himself?

Trump drug czar nominee accused of hindering opioid crackdown

Article

Trump’s newly appointed drug czar Tom Marino has been accused of failing to enforce new opioid laws. While nothing has been confirmed, these accusations are certainly troubling and need to be looked into. According to the article, he “pushed a bill that reportedly stripped a government agency of the ability to freeze suspicious painkiller shipments.” Many people believe that Marino seems to be more inclined to help companies rather than fulfill his job.

Opioid addiction has been cited as America’s biggest health crisis in recent years. Heroin, morphine, and other painkillers are opioid products, and some of the most dangerous drugs in our country.

When asked about the allegations against Marino, Trump responded, “He’s a great guy. I did see the report. We’re gonna look into the report.”

In addition, it seems to be that corrupt businesses and companies have discouraged the crackdown on recreational drugs, something that is troubling to the United States.

Trump appointed Marino to be the drug czar, but he has been accused of going against what he was entrusted to do in his job. Does this reflect badly on Trump?

How should the government handle corrupt companies and officials?

Trump Falsely Claims Obama Didn't Contact Families of Fallen Troops

In a joint news conference with Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, President Trump was asked a question regarding his lack of response to the death of the four soldiers in an ambush in Niger last week. Instead of answering the question, however, he described how he had personally reached out to the families through letters and assured that he was planning to make calls, all while comparing himself to former presidents, especially Obama, claiming that "A lot of them didn't make calls. I like to call when it's appropriate."

However, Trump did not consider the fact that Obama had held hundreds of meetings with the families of fallen soldiers throughout his two terms as president. Although Obama has declined to make a comment, this lack of acknowledgement has been noticed and criticized by many of Obama's former advisers on Twitter, including his former national security adviser who called out Trump's feud with the parents of fallen soldier Humayun Khan last year. 

When the President was later asked a follow-up question about his response regarding Obama, he seemed to take a lighter note with his opinion by claiming that he was unsure whether or not he did or did not make the calls. "President Obama, I think, probably did [reach out to families] sometimes and maybe sometimes he didn't. That's what I was told. All I can do is ask my generals."

I personally believe that it was unprofessional of Trump to try and switch up the question as a means of putting the blame on somebody else. I don't think anybody should point the finger at someone else for not giving condolences to a fallen soldier's family, especially if accusation was false.

What is your opinion on this situation? Do you think that Trump purposely made this "claim" up in order to call out Obama or was it actually a fact that Trump flat out did not know?

NY Times Article

Ireland and Britain Brace for Unusual European Hurricane

NY Times Article

Hurricane Ophelia is headed toward Ireland and Britain. Although it started off as a Category 1, it quickly became a Category 3, breaking the record for the easternmost category 3 hurricane in history. However, it’s growing strength adds to the urgency for Britain and Ireland to prepare. While Ophelia is of a lower category than some of the other hurricanes we have suffered this season, it will still bring unusual forceful winds and rain for these countries. Both countries must prepare for the oncoming destruction.

There has been an unusual amount of hurricanes this season, and Ophelia is one of the strangest. Do you think this is a coincidence, or a sign of climate change?

What do you think political leaders could do to further help their citizens after natural disasters? How could we better prepare?

Venezuelans Vote Peacefully, if Not Hopefully

Article

On Sunday, Venezuelans voted for the governors of their country’s states. While Venezuela has been plagued by recent violence, and its citizens doubt that their vote will even make a difference, some citizens still participated in the recent election. However, there are some conspiracies that the government is trying to deter Venezuelans from either voting for a candidate they don’t want, or to keep them from voting altogether. Nicolas Madura, president of Venezuela, has been accused of running a dictatorship, a statement he strongly refutes. He cites elections as proof that he is not a dictator, but many Venezuelans believe otherwise, as evident by the government’s hesitance to help people vote.

The turnout for this past election was much lower compared to others in the past. Many believe this is because Venezuelans are losing hope and trust in their government. Some citizens urge others to show opposition--else let the government continue its tyranny.

Many Venezuelans believe that there is no point in voting, because their government is just going to do what it wants anyway. I think this is a very sad perspective to have, and obviously a less than ideal situation. It is my opinion that a government should listen to and respect its citizens in order to prevent injustice.

Some Venezuelans believe the only way to achieve a just government is through revolution. Do you agree with this?

Venezuelans are losing trust in their government. Why is it important for governments to have their citizen’s trust?

In America, one thing we value is political participation. Why is political participation important as part of a democracy?

Do you think it is important for people to vote, even if a corrupt government may prevent a vote from meaning anything?

Trump to end Obamacare subsidies amid strong critism

Trump plans to cut subsidies to health insurance providers which will greatly affect low income families.  This cut comes as a response to Congress repeatedly voting against repealing Obama. Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer were outraged and said that this was, "spiteful act of vast, pointless sabotage". Even some Republicans are outraged. Florida Republican Rep, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen believes Trump is going against his campaign promises as many in her community will lose access to affordable health care. Trump will not only receive backlash from many democrats but also from medical companies. They will likely challenge his executive order in court as they've done with his early repeal efforts. Trump claims that this move is the start of his repeal and replace process and this BBC article claims that many believe this move could mean the beginning of the end for Obamacare.

Do you believe cutting subsidies was just? Was it a good idea? How should those who are critical of Trumps views on health care act going forward?

bbc article

Funding for War vs. Natural Disasters

As the US has been battered with natural disasters, the costs of aid are soaring. Hurricanes Irma, Harvey, and Maria are projected to cost the US economy nearly $135 billion, and the recent California wildfires will cost $85 billion. All this combined is $220 billion which is minuscule compared to the $700 billion the country will spend on its military in 2017. According to this Huffington Post article, Congress appropriates 70 times more money for the military as it does for FEMA ($700 to $9.9 billion). This difference in money that Congress dedicates has led to costly outcomes. First, in Puerto Rico, 85% of people still don't have electricity and 40% don't have running water. These stats are extremely high as Hurricane Maria started nearly a month ago. Another outcome of only $9.9 billion going to FEMA is that many firefighters have worked for 70 straight hours at minimum wage. Though natural disasters are inevitable and its hard to bring communities who experience them back on their feet, it seems that $9.9 billion may not be enough money.

How do you believe the US can better prepare for future natural disasters? Do you believe that military spending should be decreased and that natural disaster relief spending should be increased?

article

Woody Allen Warns of ‘Witch Hunt’ After Weinstein Allegations

Article Link

Following Harvey Weinstein's expulsion from the Motion Picture Academy, the BBC published an interview of director Woody Allen, who had worked with Weinstein on several films in the past. Allen called the wave of allegations "tragic for the poor women that were involved," but "sad for Harvey that his life is so messed up." Allen maintained that he never knew anything about any misconduct by Weinstein on any of their movie sets and that no one ever told him any "horror stories with any real seriousness." However, Allen also emphasized the dangers of a "witch hunt atmosphere, a Salem atmosphere, where every guy in an office who winks at a woman is suddenly having to call a lawyer to defend himself."
In 1994, Weinstein allowed Allen to produce a film through his company Miramax Films despite recent accusations that Allen had sexually abused his 7-year-old daughter, saying that "shunned by Hollywood means nothing to Miramax."

Is Allen right? Is there truly a present danger of a witch hunt or are predators finally being held accountable for their actions?

Poll: 46% of Republicans Support Preemptive Strike Against North Korea

Article Link
Article Link

According to a poll by Quinnipiac University published on Thursday, 46% of Republicans would support a preemptive strike against North Korea, while 26% of the general population would support such an attack. However, this figure is significantly different from the findings of Washington Post and ABC News poll from three weeks ago. The Washington Post-ABC News poll found that 30% of Republicans say that the U.S. should strike North Korea first, compared to 23% overall support of a preemptive strike. 

On the subject of North Korea, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson stated on CNN on Sunday that "those diplomatic efforts will continue until the first bomb drops." Tillerson insisted that Trump "is not seeking to go to war" despite Trumps previous tweets suggesting that negotiating with North Korea would be a waste of time.

What could explain the discrepancies between the messages of Tillerson and Trump? How about the public support of these two very different strategies?