Tag Archives: politics

Threats from North Korea? Should we be afraid?

These past couple of weeks have seen an increase in the amount of coverage on the United States and South Korea’s relationships with North Korea. If you don’t know what is going on, a spokesman for North Korea released a statement saying that the US is pushing North Korea to the brink of war and that they could be planning a mobile missile attack. But after their many failed attempts at using missiles, is this any reason to be as scared as some people are?

I personally have mixed feelings about the whole subject. No one really likes the thought of the United States, or even South Korea, being randomly attacked with a missile. And with the North Koreans ending the Korean war Armistice from 1953 who knows what will happen next. They have done this in the past, six times to be exact. But this time they actually went further than making a statement and cut off the phone line between the two countries and they also closed the border between themselves and South Korea. None of this sounds appealing, but are we really on the brink of nuclear war or is the North Korean government just using words to make Kim Jong Un look like a powerful dictator to the world and the North Korean citizens.

In a CNN article, I found this quote, “Many analysts say the increasingly belligerent talk is aimed at cementing the domestic authority of the country’s young leader, Kim Jong Un”. To be honest, I had never thought about their verbal threats like this. I can see where this makes sense, because if you’re a new, young dictator what would be a better way to get the people to love you more than threatening their number one enemy?

In all, I don’t know what is going to happen and I don’t think anyone does. (Except for maybe the North Koreans) But I appreciate that the US and South Korean governments are taking the necessary precautions, just in case something were to get out of hand.  Hopefully it doesn’t, but preparation for the worst is always a nice thing.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/04/world/asia/koreas-tensions/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/01/opinion/haggard-north-korea/index.html?iid=article_sidebar

The State of the Union Address

A cool dude. hah :)

A cool dude. hah 🙂

Two weeks ago I completely forgot to post my blog. I was being a super-slacker. And unfortunately I couldn’t find anything that is too interesting to talk about. So I’ve decided to focus on the President’s State of the Union Address. I know I’m a bit late, but I figure it’s never too late to talk about America and the President! 🙂

Quite frankly, I think it is a pretty cool event to watch. It’s not very often that you can see the members of Congress, the SCOTUS Justices, and the President all in the same room. Also the ritual of having the House Sergeant at Arms announce the President before he came in is a pretty cool thing to see. If you’ve never watch the State of the Union I highly recommend doing so. It may seem pretty boring, but it’s actually really interesting. The whole set-up of how things are done and the procedures people follow is awesome to watch.

But after everything is said and done and the President begins his speech, I feel like there is an outpouring of crowd pleasing terms that are used to please the people of the United States. Obama’s entire speech was full of rhetoric, especially when he began talking about gun control. He said that the victims of mass shootings, such as Columbine or Sandy Hook, deserve a vote. Obviously, this was a direct emotional hit to anyone who has any opinions regarding the lives lost, especially when they are children. He probably also used this in order to try to persuade some motion on a gun control bill in Congress. In an article posted on CNN, they mentioned that Obama’s State of the Union address was a less aggressive version of his inaugural speech. ( I have no idea if they are right because I unfortunately missed it) But I feel as though this was an attempt by him to get some support from the opposing party. I wouldn’t be too enthused if I was a member of Congress and my President, who was of another party, was coming out and directly attacking mine. Instead I see this approach from Obama as a wise way of working the system.

In all, Obama addressed many of the problems facing the US today. Some of which probably will be discussed in next year’s State of the Union, but hopefully some of them will not be. Obama was definitely trying to appeal to the Republicans, but I’m not so sure he did so effectively. Also, I’d just like to acknowledge Speaker of the House, John Boehner’s facial expressions throughout the entire speech.  It was hilarious. He just looked so unhappy, even when he was clapping he was still angry. I’ve posted some articles regarding the speech. Even if politics isn’t your thing I definitely think that everyone should consider watching the State of the Union. It kind of lets you know what is going on in the government, it may not be accurate to a T, but it is still good information to have. I think Obama handled himself well this year and made sure to include all things that he needed to include. And poor Marco Rubio, no one seemed to notice that he gave a speech just because he reached for a glass of water. People are interesting sometimes. Overall, the State of the Union is extremely interesting to watch because of the ritual the members of the government go through, and also because of the inclusion of information pertaining to the public. J

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/13/us/politics/obama-delivers-state-of-the-union-address.html

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/13/politics/state-of-the-union-5-things/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/politics/2013-state-of-the-union-specials-page/

Seriously, check out Boehner's face! :)

Seriously, check out Boehner’s face! 🙂

Civic Issues: NY first state to pass gun laws post-Sandy Hook massacre

For my civic issues blog I decided to focus on politics, seeing as political science is my major and I also really enjoy it! With the recent school shooting in Connecticut, there has been a lot in talks of gun control. We all know that the NRA is against anything banning guns, and then there are people who will do whatever it takes. Just this week Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York signed the first bill regarding guns. Clearly this is a huge step for any government to take. I thought this story was interesting. What exactly is included in the bill is as follows:

“The laws fortify New York’s existing assault weapons ban, limit the number of bullets allowed in magazines and strengthen rules that govern the mentally ill, which includes a requirement to report potentially harmful behavior.”

To me this does not seem like too radical of a bill to be put into place. And I also find it surprising that Cuomo was able to get support from New York’s GOP run senate. This is clearly a very relevant topic, and the first of many states laws to be created after this horrible massacre. It is a great example of the contrasting views of the people across the nation. You’ve got your gun toting, old men who think that any law banning any sort of gun is unconstitutional, and then you’ve also got your younger generation, Democrats/liberals, who are anti-gun and could care less about things like the NRA and are only concerned with the safety of people. This is a fight that we have not heard the last of. Just today, President Obama nominated Todd Jones as the new director of the ATF and laid down other plans (which I have not had a chance to look at yet). But obviously, this issue of gun control will not only be talked about on a state level, but also on a federal level. Anyways, everyone should read the article or look up info about New York’s new bill and those that are in the process of being. We will definitely be hearing a lot about guns for a while now following Sandy Hook and all other shootings that have ever happened in the past, to prevent them from happening again in the future.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/15/us/new-york-gun-bill/index.html