Theresa May Response to Free Trade Deal

Background Video:

In a referendum on 23 June 2016, a majority of British voted in support of the US withdrawing from the European Union. This proposal came to be known as “Brexit”. On Monday, British Prime Minister Theresa May responded to a new proposal regarding the implementation of a free trade agreement (similar to that of Canada) rather than leaving the European Union. May supports Brexit over the new proposition, stating that, “no deal is better than a bad deal… What we’ve put on the table is a good deal. It’s a deal that retains the unity of the United Kingdom, our constitutional integrity. It’s a deal which provides for no hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, protects jobs and enables us to have a good trade relationship with Europe and good trade relationships with the rest of the world.” If Britain were to go through with Brexit, it would increase their sovereignty and raise their economy (as it is no longer dragged down by the lower performing countries in the EU).

Discussion Questions:

- Do you agree with Theresa May regarding the new basic trade deal proposal?

- How would Brexit affect international relations for Britain?

- Is there another means for Britain of acquiring the sovereignty and economic boost they desire without removing themselves from the UN?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-32810887

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/25/no-deal-brexit-better-than-canada-style-deal-theresa-may

Scandal Shakes a Virginia House Republican, Adding to Electoral Tremors

Scott Taylor, a Republican from Virginia who is running for reelection to the House of Representatives, has recently been a part of an election scandal. Taylor’s campaign has been threatened due to accusations of him helping an independent candidate get on the ballot in order to take away votes from his Democratic opponent, Elaine Luria. His allegations include using the names of dead people or voters who do not live in the district on signature petitions. Currently, a prosecutor is investigating the case and the independent candidate, Shaun Brown, has been removed from the ballot. Taylor’s scandal is an example of one of several that the Republicans have recently been involved in, which could mean that the Democrats could gain a few more seats in the House or try to tip the majority in their favor. The Democrats have been using these scandals to label the Republican leadership as promoting a “culture of corruption.” However, despite the scandal, the winner of the election is still a toss-up. While some claim that Taylor’s actions convey dishonesty and a lack of integrity, other voters still continue to side with Taylor due to his respect gained from being a Navy SEAL and his past experience as being a representative in the House.

Discussion Questions:

1. Do you think this scandal will have a major impact on the reputation of the Republicans? If so, will this scandal have a major impact on the Republican majority in the House?
2. What should the punishment be for candidates who engage in unfair election practices?
3. Do you think Scott Taylor still has a chance of winning even though he is involved in this scandal?

#WhyIDidntReport: Survivors of Sexual Assault Share Their Stories After Trump Tweet

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/23/us/why-i-didnt-report-assault-stories.html?action=click&module=RelatedCoverage&pgtype=Article&region=Footer

After the assault allegations against Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee, Brett M. Kavanaugh, President Trump questioned the severity of Ford’s attack and whether or not she may have been exaggerating. He claims that if the attack was as bad as she claims it was, her or her parents would have reported it sooner. In response, survivors of abuse have come out with a new hashtag, #WhyIDidntReport, to rally that it is often difficult to tell their story. I understand where these women are coming from because trauma is often hard to process and tell others about. The start of the #MeToo movement has encouraged women to come forward with their stories despite their fears, traumas, shame, and anger that comes with the thought of their abuse; this is uplifting considering that in the past, women often were not given a voice. 

Discussion Questions:

Was Trump going out of line for making such claims? 

Is it understandable as to why these women find it hard to share their stories right away? 

How has the #MeToo movement helped women finally come forward and deal with their abuse?

Google C.E.O. Denies Allegations of Political Bias in Search Results

Last month, Donald Trump accused Google and many other social media sites, namely Twitter and Facebook, for allegedly “intentionally suppressing” conservative news outlets that are supportive of his administration. He tweeted, “they are controlling what we can & cannot see. This is a very serious situation-will be addressed!” This Friday, Google’s chief executive, Sundar Pichai, sent an email to employees stating that Google has never and will never bias its search results for political purposes. However, this was followed up by a Wall Street Journal article stating that in early 2017 Google employees’ discussed in an internal email the possibility of including pro-immigration content in search after President Trump’s travel ban was put in place. In response, Gina Scigliano, a Google spokeswoman claimed that the ideas were not put into effect and was just a brainstorming session among employees. Currently, Google, Facebook and Twitter have denied political bias in the algorithmic tailoring of news content. Google did not attend the congressional hearing this month addressing lawmakers’ questions about social media manipulation which was attended by Twitter’s chief executive, Jack Dorsey, and Facebook’s chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg.

Discussion Questions:

1.Do you think search engines have some power over the information that citizens seek?

2.Do you think Donald Trump’s points are valid?

3.In what ways do you think social media bias can impact our democracy?

Original Article (NYT): Google C.E.O. Denies Allegations of Political Bias in Search Results

President Trump's Trade War with China

Article Link: "China Once Looked Tough On Trade. Now Its Options Are Dwindling." 

China has exponentially increased their control over the world's economy which has led to numerous actions by President Trump to limit this rise of economic power. Thus, Trump has decided to retaliate repeatedly with tariffs placed on China's exports thus making them less appealing to the consumers in the US which, ultimately, leads to the decrease in demand for China's goods as they are more expensive than American made ones or other imports. Recently, Trump has proposed his final plan to place 10% tariffs on "$200 billion a year of Chinese goods." This tactic to place tariffs on China's goods has consistently hurt China's economy, and they cannot retaliate to the same caliber since they do not purchase/need merely as many US exports. Moreover, as the US restricts China's economic potential through tariffs, China is very limited in terms of which actions it can take. China cannot simply encourage the closing of certain factories or the boycott of US goods because this can taint their reputation as a good country to do business with and possibly remove many workers from employment. Moreover, completely surrendering to the tariffs imposed by the US would lead to the Chinese public thinking their government has seized to fight back. Although China still is being hurt by the trade war, the US could also be injuring itself through making businesses pay for the tariffs of necessary goods which could lead to a decrease in support for Trump even though a majority from both parties agree with his trade tactics. Finally, the most recent rejected solution from the Chinese government proposed that tariffs would be based on "proportions of trade" which would mean the fraction of tariffs imposed by the US would be equal to that imposed by China. This would allow the US to still restrict some of China's economic growth as well as granting China the ability to stabilize its economy once again.

This trade war has been part of Trump's numerous tax reform plans which has led to an increase in the polarization in the US since some people completely support him while others do not. Moreover, if it persists, this specific trade war could deteriorate a major section of the globalized economy. It could lead to a decrease in economic relations between the US and China which then lead to less services at higher prices thus creating a chain reaction that forces many Americans to spend money which they did not spend before thus putting some Americans in debt. This trade war could also lead to the willingness of other countries to dissociate from relations with the US and/or China.

Ultimately, I think that the trade war is impractical and there are many more effective ways to limit the rise of China's economic power. Trump could simply retain the tariffs rather than increasing or threatening to increase them as this already restricts China's economic growth potential. Moreover, China consistently refuses to take the high road as their "hard-liners" want to retaliate evenly to the US' actions which contributes to the impracticality of the situation. Furthermore, although many pro-American businesses may be happy with the trade tactics, if a compromise is met, many Americans could possibly lose their jobs as the need for American workers will decrease since more Chinese goods can be bought meaning that less American goods are needed. On China's side, I was surprised that their government rejected the plan to make tariffs based on trade amount rather than the dollar value. This would ensure that their currency is not inflated which could help them in the long run.

Discussion Questions:
1. If neither country agrees to a compromise, could this trade war lead to a bigger economic dispute which hurts the globalized economy? Why or why not?

2. Since China cannot boycott or encourage the closing of factories to avoid US economic relations, what are some solutions that China can take so that they can maintain their economy while satisfying the US?

3. How has the trade war affected Trump's popularity? If Trump is not reelected, do you think the trade impositions like tariffs on goods will remain? Why or why not?

4. Besides more tariffs, what are some alternative actions that Trump could have taken in order to control China's economic rise?

Governor Brown's passion for environmental protection

Article link                         Source: Rich Pedroncelli, Associated Press

California Governor Jerry Brown continues working to make environmental protection part of his legacy as the last few months of his fourth and final term as governor come to an end. He was first elected governor in the 1970's as a young man, serving two terms then and was a supporter of the early years of the solar industry. After three unsuccessful presidential campaigns, time as the CA attorney general, and two more terms as governor, climate change remains one of his passions. As he leads a conference this week, he battles the federal government which announced last year that the U.S. would leave the Paris Climate Agreement. Meanwhile, Brown has set ambitious goals for CA to get five million electric cars on the road by 2030, mandate 100 percent carbon free electricity by 2045, and push forward on the long term high speed rail project.

Discussion Questions
1. How do you feel about Governor Brown's continued push for environmental protection in the face of federal opposition?
2. Will the efforts California is making to protect the environment actually make a difference, or is Brown right to be skeptical?
3. What action do you hope to see from our new governor next year on the issue of climate change?

Fatal Shark Attack Off Cape Cod Is First in Massachusetts Since 1936

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/us/cape-cod-shark-attack.html

Arthur Medici, 26, was pronounced dead at Cape Cod Hospital in Hyannis after a fatal shark attack. This attack occurred on September 15th at Newcomb Hollow Beach in Wellfleet. It is speculated that Medici was attacked by a great white shark. The population of seals in Cape Cod has increased, and as a result, so has the population of its predator: the great white shark. This has not been the only recent shark attack. Another man was attacked by a shark a month ago at a Cape Cod beach but was able to survive. Following the incident, beaches in Wellfleet were closed for swimming. Marine animals and sharks are protected by federal law.

There has been a rise in shark attacks globally. People are blaming climate change (leading to warmer waters) for an abundance of people and sharks in the water. This increases the odds of encountering one another.

1. Do you think the number of shark attacks will continue to rise?
2. What do you think is causing a larger number of shark attacks globally? Climate change, overpopulation of both humans and sharks, etc.
3. Should marine animals be protected by federal law? Are they well protected under this law?

Two Koreas hold high-stakes summit with nuclear talks in jeopardy

South Korea’s President, Moon Jae-in, has plans to cross the DMZ on September 18 to meet with Kim Jung Un for the third time regarding the denuclearization and the ending of hostile relations between the two Koreas. North Korea is looking for security guarantees and ending of hostile relations in exchange for denuclearization, which is what the US and South Korea have been pursuing ever since the confirmation that North Korea has nuclear weapons. Moon hopes to propose a framework that would lead to denuclearization and officially end the Korean War. Issues over North Korean hostility and tension has lasted years, ever since the armistice of the Korean War in 1953. Tensions have been high since the armistice and Moon is hoping to deescalate the tensions as soon as possible; however, the US is unenthusiastic about ending the war before any nuclear talks can be finalized. Talks between North Korea have occurred before, but led to no results. Will this one be any different?

Discussion Questions:

Do you think North Korea will work with the US to finalize nuclear agreements?

What do you think should be proposed to help deescalate and help resolve the tension in the region?

How will North Korea react to US plans for denuclearization?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-southkorea-summit/two-koreas-hold-high-stakes-summit-with-nuclear-talks-in-jeopardy-idUSKCN1LX1SC

Kavanaugh’s Nomination in Turmoil as Accuser Says He Assaulted Her Decades Ago

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/16/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-sexual-assault.html?action=click&module=RelatedCoverage&pgtype=Article&region=Footer
Brett Kavanaugh has been circulating in the news throughout the last few months after President Trump nominated him to fill Justice Kennedy's spot in the Supreme Court after his retirement in July. However, in a recent interview with the Washington Post, a pyschology professor in Palo Alto named Christine Ford accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault. Naturally, this accusation came with much controversy, as Republican defenders of Kavanaugh criticize Ford's timing in an attempt to invalidate her claims, while many Democrats stand by her and the courage it requires to make this information public. However, while the Ford's accusation against Kavanaugh was only recently announced, California Senator Dianne Feinstein was aware of the information for weeks before this, and only now submitted the information into evidence.
The revelation of this information has placed the senate hearing for Kavanaugh's Supreme Court approval on hold, and a hearing will instead be held to assess the validity of the accusations made against him. Ford's accusations against Kavanaugh mirror those of Anita Hill against Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas in 1991, where Hill's allegations against Justice Thomas were invalidated and he was appointed to the Court.
Discussion Questions:
1. Why wouldn't Feinstein publish the information regarding Ford's sexual assault accusations when she first found out about it? How do you believe this is/was perceived by other Senators?
2. Do you believe that the allegations against Kavanaugh will threaten his seat on the Supreme Court, or will the public simply forgive and forget similar to the numerous accusations made against President Trump?
3. How will strong party affiliation/loyalty impact this case? Will Republican senators stand by him in order to guarantee a more conservative judiciary?

Hurricane Florence Is a Formidable Test for FEMA and Trump

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/12/us/politics/trump-hurricane-florence-fema.html

In the past week, Hurricane Florence has wreaked havoc over the Carolinas, bringing attention to the government’s efforts to protect the people in those areas. The hurricane has reached a diameter of around 400 miles and is still growing larger, devastating more families. There have been incredibly harmful hurricanes including Maria, Irma, and Harvey, each of which hurt many Americans with high death tolls. Trump commented on his Twitter, congratulating the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for an “unappreciated great job.” However, Trump clearly showed a lack of knowledge about the realities of Maria, not even acknowledging the death toll due to unpreparedness. Many have cast criticisms to the government for not being prepared for the disaster that struck and not responding soon enough with fresh water, food and restoring the power, costing several lives. To this effect, the FEMA admitted that they were not prepared for the storm to be as large as it was, and thus underestimated the supplies they would need to bring to the island of Puerto Rico.

With Hurricane Florence being the first major storm of the year, all eyes are on Trump to see how he will respond and what federal action will be taken to help those stuck in the floods caused by the hurricane. People are curious to see if FEMA will step up and take more actions than it did during Maria to protect the people in the Carolinas as the storm grows. Moreover, Trump’s actions are critical to see whether or not the Republicans can hold onto the House control. Midterms elections are nearing, the results of which could greatly impact the party control in Congress. With Trump’s approval ratings decreasing rapidly, his efforts in the Carolinas could heavily influence the voters and candidates running in the midterm election. The big question is whether or not Trump will allocate more money to help the emergency relief forces or continue to push for change in immigration laws and other less urgent issues.

Personally, I wasn’t incredibly shocked upon reading this article saying that Trump did not highly emphasize disaster preparedness even after the events in Puerto Rico. However, I was surprised to hear that he moved $10 million from FEMA to give to Immigration and Customs Enforcement with the purpose of improving systems of deporting undocumented immigrants. I was appalled to hear that Trump cared more about sending home these immigrants than about protecting Americans who are unfairly suffering from natural disasters without access to basic staples. This connects to international affairs because by spending more money on immigration laws, Trump is deporting more and more people, which has a negative impact on the foreign relation the US has with other countries.

Discussion Questions: 
1. Do you think that disaster preparedness and emergency relief efforts should be the states and local governments’ responsibility or that of the federal government?
2. Why do you think that the President’s actions are so highly scrutinized during any natural disaster?
3. How do you think that Trump’s actions and response to Hurricane Florence could affect the results of the midterm elections?
4. Do you predict that Trump will neglect the families struggling in the Carolinas or do you believe he will step up and try to prevent further damage with FEMA?

Dallas Officer Kills Man in his Own Home

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/10/us/dallas-police-shooting-guyger-jean.html

On Thursday, September 6th at 10pm, off duty officer, Amber R. Guyger (30) returned to her apartment complex after a shift in full uniform and parked her car on the wrong floor of the garage. According to an arrest warrant affidavit she walked into what she thought was her apartment with the door already ajar and saw a "large silhouette" of a black man that she believed to be a burglar. She gave "verbal commands" before firing her weapon twice, striking Mr. Jean once in the chest and it wasn't until she called 911 and turned the lights on that she realized she was in the wrong apartment. However, a lawyer for Mr. Jean's family challenged parts of the officer's account, including her claim the door was ajar. He said witnesses had said that they heard banging on the door and a woman's saying, "let me in". Even if Guyger did mistake the apartment, which has a distinctive red doormat outside, for her own, he said, there is no indication that Mr. Jean acted aggressively to make the officer fear for her life. So far the Dallas District Attorney has decided the case should be further investigated and it is likely Guyger will be charged with anything from murder to manslaughter.
Although many are suspicious as to whether the shooting was racially motivated there is not enough conclusive evidence to determine whether or not it was merely an accident. Recently, many local governments have proposed police officers wear body cams to record all interactions and this incident could be used to further that proposal. Some believe the federal government should intervene given the quantity of innocent civilian shootings to implement federal law regarding racial bias conduct, possible mandatory body cams, or other courses of action.

Questions:
1) Do you believe local government, federal government, or neither should implement laws such as mandatory body cams or racial bias training?
2) Is it possible Guyger's shooting was racially motivated or do you think it was a mere accident and if so should she be prosecuted for murder?
3) Given the recent attention police misconduct  (especially race related incidents) have gotten what other measures could be taken to prevent and monitor future misconduct? 

Article 11 and 13 Approved by the EU

Back in July, the EU Copyright Directive was rejected by the MEPs due to concerns over the controversial Articles 11 and 13 raised by EU citizens. Article 11, which can also be referred to as a "link tax," was written to protect news sites and their intellectual property, and mandated that other sites needed to have a license from the original publisher in order to link to their articles. Article 13, which can also be referred to as an "upload filter," required that websites have filters in place to filter out copyrighted material. Criticisms of these two articles included the potential damage they could do to small business, which could not afford to pay license or put in place filters on their websites; and possible infringement on free use, as a computer system will not be able to accurately tell when copyrighted material is being used under acceptable free use guidelines.

However, rather than the bill being killed, it instead underwent a waiting period and a chance for  amendments before being presented for approval again. This time, the bill was approved by the EU with 438 for and 226 against. 2 amendments, one for each article, have been passed along with the bill, although the core directive remains the same. Article 11 has been adjusted to allow for individual from a hyperlink to be shared, while before none of it was allowed to be shared. However, the language is vague, and what qualifies as "individual words" is not clearly defined. Article 13 has been changed so that only websites with significant amounts of uploads are affected, and exceptions are made for small websites and non-profits. Similarly, there are no clear definitions as to what would qualify as as website with significant uploads, or a small website.


1. When it comes to internet regulations, there are a lot of debates as to the level of control local and/or national governments should have. What is your personal opinion as to how website regulation should be handled?

2. How do you think the Copyright Directive will affect other countries if it were to be passed?

3. Despite there being many concerns and disapproval for the bill among citizens, it still passed in the EU Parliament. What do you think that says about the state of EU democracy?

After Serena Williams incident, the USTA head says there’s a double standard in tennis

On Saturday, Naomi Osaka and Serena Williams faced off in the women's final at the US Open. Osaka went on to win the first game. During the second game, Wiliams received two violations, the second leading to a point being given to Osaka; the third violation resulted in a game being given to Osaka.

During and after the match, Williams claimed that she was being treated this way because she is a woman. The CEO of the USTA has agreed that there are double standards in tennis, as some men have berated umpires worse than Williams and not faced as severe of repercussions.

I think that both Williams and the chair umpire, Carlos Ramos, could have handled the situation differently. Ramos involved himself in the match too much; even though he was following the code, in such a high stake match, warnings are more common than violations. After the first or second violation, he could have told Williams that if she didn't lay off, he would have to take further action. Williams also let her passion get the best of her. It's important to recognize that she was standing up for her principles, but she knows that the umpire has a lot of control of the match. While this incident was more out of control than most, it definitely highlighted double standards in the sports world.

Do you think that the chair umpire was being gender-biased? Did they both let the situation get out of control? Did Serena face appropriate consequences?

Article link
Coaching Rule

Trump Administration to Close PLO Office

On Monday, the State Department announced the shut down of the unofficial Palestinian embassy in Washington D.C.. The Palestinian Liberation Organization is not technically an embassy representing Palestinian people because the U.S. does not recognize Palestine as a state; however, the P.L.O. offices function with the same purposes as an embassy. The State Department marks the reason for shut down as Palestine is not taking advances for meaningful negotiations with Israel. Additionally, the report mentions that the U.S. is concerned with Palestine's attempts to investigate Israel’s crimes on the border of Gaza through the International Criminal Court. Palestine negotiator Saeb Erekat declares that these actions are a form of bullying and “collective punishment” against the Palestinian people and also claim it is part of a plan to cover up Israel’s crimes. This decision comes after the Trump Administration formally recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, sparking much controversy and debate. These actions have contributed to the deepening rift between the US and Palestine.

Do you think the Trump Administration’s actions were smart in this political climate? Is there any other way the US could have approached the situation?

What does this mean for US’ international relations and how other countries perceive the states?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/palestinians-slam-usvicious-blackmail-as-their-washington-office-is-closed-down/2018/09/10/b49f613e-b4d1-11e8-94eb-3bd52dfe917b_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.092048af472d

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-administration-close-palestine-liberation-organization-office-dc/

Obama Midterm Election Rally

With the 2018 midterm elections coming soon, former President Barack Obama made a rare appearance at the University of Chicago on Friday, where he spoke about the current political climate. At one point he asked the crowd, "What happened to the Republican party?" Indicating the obvious dysfunction the current administration is having. However, the most surprising part of the speech was not his advice to vote, but his demure way of dissing the current President. The former President stated, "It did not start with Donald Trump, he is a symptom, not the cause. He is just capitalizing on resentment that politicians have been fanning for years." Claiming that Trump is harping on the American people to create a divided nation and more problems. By dividing the country nothing will be done, and it makes it harder for the people to work the government. So, Obama urged the audience to go and vote during the next midterm elections, saying, "You've got to vote. When you vote, you've got the power." By urging the college students in the audience go out and vote, Obama claims that it will, "restore some semblance of sanity to our politics." The White House came back with a statement, and claims  that Obama was coming back into the political light to, "case that our country is on the wrong track ." Obama will continue his rally campaign throughout the next two months.

Questions: 1) Do agree with Obama that voting in the Midterm elections will create changes towards a positive direction?
2)  Do you think Obama's speech will have an impact on the number of youth voting?
3) Obama got a lot of criticism for his comments about the Republican party, do you think it was justified? Why or why not?

Source: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dramatic-change-obama-hits-campaign-trail-swinging-trump/story?id=57675836

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/07/politics/barack-obama-illinois-midterms-speech/index.html

Quiet resistance within the Trump adminstration

Article link

                                          Source: Business Insider

The news story is a NYT piece about the general chaos in the administration over the past week of pieces discussing the situation inside the white house as a chaotic mess where staffers intentionally try and prevent some of Trump's destructive actions. Notable pieces that tell this story are an anonymous NYT editorial written by an anonymous high level official in the Trump administration, and a book by Bob Woodward, who was one of the journalists critical in uncovering the truth of Watergate, which eventually lead to Nixon's impeachment. This is critical for international relations because the President is meant to represent the US, and if his authority is being bypassed by members of his cabinet, that is incredibly unusual. This will also have some unknown impact on the midterm elections later this year, as people may be more willing to vote Republican even if they dislike Trump because they think other Republicans still have their best interests in mind. 

Some questions to discuss: 1) Is presidential cabinet members deliberately and secretly acting against the President's wishes absolutely unacceptable regardless of circumstance, or is there some situation which may make such an act allowable, if so what? 2) What effect will these revelations have on the midterm elections.

Controversy over Kaepernick's Appearance in New Nike Ad Campaign

Announced on Monday, Nike's 30th anniversary "Just Do It" campaign has been quickly met with considerable criticism nationwide. The controversy seems to be primarily due to its feature of former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick. In 2016, the quarterback's decision to kneel during the national anthem in protest of police violence caused much dispute. Now, with Kaepernick as the face of the campaign, the debate has been rejuvenated. In response to the campaign, protesters have burned Nike products and called for a boycott of Nike products, ultimately leading to a drop in Nike stocks. President Trump has also spoken out, calling the ad a "terrible decision." Meanwhile, others praise Kaepernick and Nike's decision as being a clever method of both representing the brand and promoting social activism.

Comparing it to other nonviolent protest such as the Occupy Wall Street and Civil Rights movements, Kaepernick and his supporters have backed his actions as simply exercising his freedom of speech, a core principle of the United States government.

Questions:

1. Do you think it was a good decision for Nike to include Kaepernick in the campaign (economically, socially, etc.)?

2. It has almost been two years since Kaepernick first kneeled, and there have been many other events since then that have influenced the debate. However, despite two years having passed, there seems to be little progress on either side of the argument. Why do you think this is so? When it comes to controversy over such nonviolent protests, will there ever be a consensus? If so, what will need to be done?

Sources:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2018/09/04/trump-calls-nikes-colin-kaepernick-ad-a-terrible-message-but-tempers-criticism/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.cbc6ce0e2c4f

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nike-kaepernick/kaepernick-ads-spark-boycott-calls-but-nike-is-seen-as-winning-in-the-end-idUSKCN1LK1DK

Brett Kavanaugh's first hearing, partisan fury, and protestor arrests

Brett Kavanaugh is a 53 year old judge that currently serves on the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit and is President Trump’s pick for Supreme Court Justice nominee. Many people are concerned about his nomination for numerous reasons, the biggest one being his conservative bias. Democrats are especially concerned about this because of the many laws and decisions he could now help overturn. Many are concerned with cases such as the Roe v. Wade case in which abortion was legalized as he would be the 5th male judge on the Supreme Court and would make the Supreme Court majority conservative. He is also stated to be in favor of big businesses and expansive presidential power which worries many that he will protect the president from the due process of the law. This was one of the main arguments that Democrats brought up during his first trial claiming that he will most likely be ill-intentioned.  

Democrats interrupted multiple times during the first court hearing claiming that the Republicans are withholding certain documents that have important information about Brett Kavanaugh. The judge claimed that there were enough documents being read and reviewed and denied the Democrats request. The Democrats continuously attempted to postpone the hearing with interruptions and requests but the chairman declared that there was no solid reason for the hearing to be postponed.

Many protestors also shouted their opinions during the hearing which ended with about 70 arrests. Many people yelled their opposition to the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh and were escorted out showing the immense opposition there is to his nomination. Some senators called this a “mob rule” and “disrespectful” to the law; however, other senators claimed it was merely a showcase of true democracy in which people have the right to state their opinions and not be cruelly punished for it.

Questions:

1) Are political parties becoming too divisive? Why or why not?

2) Do you think people should be allowed to interrupt the hearing? Why or why not?


Websites:- https://www.npr.org/2018/09/04/644602519/kavanaugh-hearings-day-1-protesters-focus-on-roe-attempted-handshake-goes-viral- https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/kavanaugh-hearing-trumps-nominee-will-pledge-to-be-a-neutral-and-impartial-arbiter/2018/09/04/5fbaec1a-b035-11e8-9a6a-565d92a3585d_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.246c7ecd778c
- https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/kavanaugh-hearing-dle/index.html

John McCain is honored at Washington National Cathedral cathedral service, yet Donald Trump is not invited.

This past Saturday, late Senator John McCain of Arizona was honored at his funeral at the Washington National Cathedral. He died August 25, 2018 after stopping his cancer treatment following a long battle with brain cancer. The Senator was remembered as a war hero, former congressman, senator, and Republican presidential candidate, bringing together both Democratic and Republican politicians. This included guests such as Barack and Michelle Obama, George W. and Laura Bush, Bill and Hillary Clinton, and many others. Though the funeral portrayed a wide range of politicians, John McCain insisted before his death that current President Donald Trump would not be invited nor welcome at his service.

In the past, McCain had blocked some of Trump’s proposed policies, and Trump repeatedly attacked McCain for his military strategy back during the Vietnam War. A major place of conflict is when Senator McCain refused to vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act which seemed to have blindsided the President back in 2017. The two engaged in several more conflicts, and McCain continued to express his discontent about the President Trump's actions as seen by his decision not to invite him to his funeral. Instead, Trump spent his day golfing and tweeting about unrelated political events.

During the funeral, Barack Obama, George W. Bush, and McCain’s daughter, Meghan McCain, delivered touching eulogies, all of which subtly expressed criticism for Donald Trump and his political agenda. In fact, Meghan McCain stated that “the America of John McCain has no need to be made great again because America was always great,” which targets Trump’s founding slogan. Similarly, though Obama’s and Bush’s speeches did not explicitly mention Donald Trump’s name, they made sure that their tributes would be heard with an unspoken contrast to our current President. These comments from very well-known politicians resonate with the people about the current tense political state.

Questions:

1. What does Trump’s absence at McCain’s funeral reveal about the current political state?

2. What message do you think McCain tried to send to Trump by declaring him unwelcome at his funeral?

Sources: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/01/us/politics/john-mccain-funeral.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/01/us/politics/trump-john-mccain.html

http://time.com/4993304/john-mccain-donald-trump-feud-remarks/