With this power in our political system nothing new ever gets a chance to be implemented into our lives. I mean I agree with Congress that such a big project would certainly be beneficial to the economy and open up a huge amount of job opportunities. The opposers believe that the issue will hurt the environment and this to them is too big of a risk to take. Well I’ve heard Obama state before we need to bring more jobs to our country at home, well wouldn’t this be a perfect chance at doing that? There are two branches of government here battling back and forth between the pros and cons of the proposed new project, but in my opinion the President is wrong and the pro’s certainly outweigh the
The Crucible/Goodnight and Good Luck Essay In ‘The Crucible,’ John Procter gives his life to defend his concept of justice and truth. Two and a half centuries later, Edward R. Murrow went against Joseph McCarthy to defend democracy and truth, which he felt were being threatened, risking his television show and career in the process. One could say that these two individuals were foolish in the risks that they took, especially considering that there was no guarantee that their fight would be won. Both individuals could easily have gone on with their lives and careers without having to jeopardize anything. But they made the sacrifice and chose to do so anyways.
The president used his connections to not be prosecuted what he thought was indefinitely was soon found out by Elise. The story of the president not being is plausible because of the evidence to support that with the correct means can potentially get away but in some instances there’s only a point where money and connections can help you. This is important to the story since the only reason the president would even risk the United States and terrorists negotiating was since he was being
Many people believe we invaded Iraq for the wrong reasons and I would have to agree. I do not think we invaded because we truly felt like we protecting the people in Iraq or trying to prevent future attacks. I believe we had our own political and economic agenda for invading. People will argue that we were attacked and we needed to defend ourselves. I would argue that we did not exhaust every possible scenario before we entered with violence.
Rather they are basing their facts on controversial issues. Granted this might be the reasons families have changed, but Fox and Fumia should have conducted their own research on this subject matter to make their article more reliable. Interviewing several families, does not proof why the constructions of families have differed from the traditional family. Further, none of the families interviewed by Fox and Fumia held the government liable for their new way of life. They simply choose this way of life, because it suited them the best.
Gaddafi still has weapons of mass destruction, so putting our military out there would be extremely dangerous. I believe a no-fly zone is a great idea though, but by doing that, we can end up harming the people that we are trying to help. We would cause a war with a Muslim country. So I really like how Obama is taking caution to go to Libya, and just not sending our military out there without double and triple thinking it. Also if we put our troops out into Libya, we don't know how long we would be there for.
I believe the Bush Administration should not have done any of these things because if they had not done this, then we would not be in terrible situation. We would not be broke. None of the Americans would have lost their jobs and we would not be at war still. The first reason as to why the Bush Administration should be punished is because it had tortured terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. In the article “A Body of Inquiries”, Jack M. Balkin wrote that punishment and
What I would have done differently in the case of Martin Luther King Jr. consists of having adequate security in place to avoid being murdered in cold blood. Organizing a sound security team that could access the level of danger for each rally or protest to ensure my safety as well as others. In the case of Bill Gates, I would have kept the company solid and worked more with other companies to avoid the monopoly trial that federal government accused him of having a monopoly. This trial hurt his creditability and the company had to work very hard to regain that confidence back. Conclusion In conclusion, great thinkers like Bill Gates and Martin Luther King Jr. have revolutionized the way the world thinks and with great thinkers, the sky is the limit with what can be accomplished in the future that will make things better for generations to come.
I want a government that will do whatever it takes to protect its people. I honestly do not understand why this opinion is so unpopular. It would not make us just as bad as the Saddam Hussein's and Osama Bin Laden's of the world. There is a big difference between torturing someone for say, being a homosexual, and torturing someone to protect innocent people's lives. It seems that either most Americans do not have the stomach for it or they seem to believe that sympathy for terrorists is somehow a moral virtue.
The First Amendment gave each and every United States citizen the right to free speech. The Founding Fathers knew what they were getting in to when they gave us these Amendments. They did not want to run the country with an iron fist, but with an open hand. On a larger scale, I believe that the governments should regulate what is said on the Internet. That might help to scare away some threats of terrorism that different countries receive.