What Americans do have a right to is their opinion and the means by which to express it, no matter if the opinion is favorable or not. There are some advocates who champion for restrictions on unfavorable speech, like violent or racist remarks. And though the intentions behind such beliefs are made in good faith, it is unrealistic to believe the mission of filtering out racist speech could be completed without catching in the same net all kinds of other speech that is considered "OK" (Lawrence III 514). I firmly believe that a government that tells its citizens what is appropriate to say will soon be dictating what they may think also, and by that, it is unlawful for the government to regulate racist or violent speech. By doing so the government would intrude on students' creativity and learning process, would set illusive restraints on racist behavior, and undermine the Constitution at whole.
Americans today have much concern about the concept of outsourcing. Ron Hira and Anil Hira in there book Outsourcing America, pose the question “Who is right and why is there difference in opinion whether this is good for America?” Critics continue to argue that outsourcing has a negative impact on American jobs, the economy, national security and pose that should this be allowed to continue, a prosperous future for all Americans is dim. However, it is also profitable for all to view their complaints as objectively as possible because they would never mention the vast benefits that come with outsourcing, especially here in America. Yes, the subject does bring a lot of insecurity and confrontation, but there are those who see it differently. While outsourcing has negative and positive implications, in the long run the future for American will lean towards the positive side of the scale.
Since that time, historians and scholars have tended to either regard Long and Coughlin as instigators of an irrational and anti-democratic uprising or as leaders and advocates of a great, forward moving social transformation. Brinkley contests both of these views quite persuasively. He maintains that Long and Coughlin had the ability to make clear the feelings of the American public that sought a means to defend the autonomy of the individual and to beat off the violations of the modern industrial state. The followers of Long and Coughlin, according to Brinkley, did not long for an economic collective, but rather for a return to a society where the individual had control over his own life and the power in society resided in institutions that were both visible and accessible from a local level. However, neither one of these leaders ever offered the American public logical plans for obtaining these goals.
Many of Dr. Roy Spencer’s views I can see as very rational. His references of actual government actions better proves how the United States government tends to want to use money as a “magic pill” that will fix the cancerous economic state the country has been in for years. While I am sure that there are politician who are still concerned with the well being of the average American, Dr Spencer’s comments about the job security in politics ,without accountability for wrong doing, should open the eyes of every American that has allowed for this corruption to
Because of this reminder, the reader can empathize with these immigrants when they feel many of our financial problems are unjustly blamed on them. This empathy leads into a value proof; that is, it is wrong to demonize a group of people based on incomplete information. The article also seems to use the demonstrations as an example of another value proof: it is good for a mischaracterized segment of our society to demonstrate in the public forum so that their grievances can be heard. Quindlen points out that such demonstrations have a long history in our country and have been used in the past to bring attention to real or perceived injustices. In my opinion, the emotional component of this essay tugs at the readers’ heart but leaves too much room for disagreement.
I know what they do is for the benefit of everyone in this country and it is extremely hard to make the decision’s that is going to affect the way we live and how we live. This documentary relates to foreign policy to the different branches of government and how every decision is made. This relates to private parties like the ACLU to protect our civil liberties that were lost as a result of policies that expand the government’s power to invade people’s privacy and right to the First Amendment. It made clear that certain things that were unlawful like racial profiling and stopping anyone under suspicion was “ok.” Top Secret America is one of the many examples of what we do not know about our government. We do not take the time to pay attention to what is happening in this economy.
Thoreau believes that the government takes the power out of the people’s hands. He also believes that majority rule overpowers the conscience of man and that it is handled in a very improper manner. This also plays into how he feels about the unjust laws in the government. Thoreau thinks that the unjust laws aren’t fixed because Americans believe they have to have a majority of people who agree that the law is unjust and he thinks that that shouldn’t be the case. Thoreau only has the American people’s interest at heart and want them to become a better and greater people, this is what makes him a patriot.
Obama states ‘We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan.’ The war in the Middle East is an extremely controversial topic in America right now. Lots of people still think that we are doing a good job over there and that we are helping the people of the Middle East. But others say that we are only destroying and hurting the situation. Pres. Obama has already stated that we will take troops
American citizens and politicians alike began calling the conflict the “second war of independence.” The political standpoint of entering the war was to preserve the rights of sailors and would-be American immigrants from British impressments. The US also wanted to prove that big brother Britain could not tell them who they could and could not trade with anymore (meaning France). This was an easy pill for the American public to swallow because of continued tensions with Britain after the Revolution and the rise of the anti-Britain, Democratic-Republican Administration and
Often, people are against increased immigration as a result of the influence of your opinion in government and society, creating an “anti-immigrant feeling” that has spread throughout the world and created “patterns of discrimination and criminalization” (Anderson). This has caused much of the blame for a poor economy or society to be put upon immigrants, whether it is their fault or not (Anderson). John Isbister, professor at Princeton University, is an excellent example of the portion of American citizens that carry such a mindset. He states that having too many immigrants lowers the standard of living because the increase in population creates an inverse relationship to the output per person. In addition, he states that some immigrants create a fiscal burden on local governments by using more city resources than they contribute to in revenue.