More Bad News for Republicans

The Republican party took another blow when Arlen Specter left the party to join the Democrats. Republicans continue to lose a hold for power, and are struggling to find who they are. The party is disorganized right now, and need to find a leader. 

Voters

I feel that voters do not vote on the issues and how they feel about them . I feel like today more than ever the general public has very little education on the true issues, and the way their candidate of favored party stands on the issue. So I do not feel that either of the arguments either by Fiorina or by Frank are really correct in that people do not know the issues, nor the root of the issues. In politics today everything is influenced by the media, and the surrounding environment in which one person is. The media won Barak Obama the election in 2008, the portrayed him in a certain way that was appealing to the general public. I am not saying that everyone who voted for Obama was not educated about his stance on certain issues, I am sure many people were, but at the same time he became larger than the presidency. He was the man the media was looking for, a well spoken mild mannered man who is good looking and could appeal to the media centered world we live in. Barak Obama won the votes of students, and their high turn out helped win him the election, but the face time he had on many student oriented television stations and Internet sights was overwhelming. So many people ate up his image and never considered what he stood for, or listened to his stance on the issues. Although their was in general good numbers for presidential debates on tv I feel people already put on the blinders and did not actually listen to the man they were going to vote for. I think it is essential for people to be informed unbiasedly in order to provide a vote that is truly how they feel, and this does not seem to be happening anytime soon.

Why Bartels is Right

I feel that Bartels is right when it comes to his argument about why people vote the way they do. I think he makes some excellent points when talking about how a person votes, and how he proves Frank wrong. This is an important issue in politics, figuring out why people vote the way they do, as well as if these people are truly voting in their best interest. 

As far as I am concerned I feel that a main point made my Bartels that makes him right is that he declares that it is not the poor people voting on morals but the educated and wealthy. I feel as if this is very true, especially looking at the last few elections. I feel as if most people chose who they are voting for based upon their moral values, even those poor southerners, who vote Republican more often than Democrat. It could be said though that Democrats could help these people more than Republican economic policy, but these people still vote Republican more than Democrat based upon social issues. Bartels is right because he seems to feel that more people are voting based on their feelings on social issues, rather than economic policy as Frank feels. It was evident in this last election that regardless of money, even in an election where economics played such a large role, more people came out and voiced their opinion because of how they felt about social issues. Take a look at all the stars in Hollywood, and affluent people in the world, they never campaigned on the side of President Obama because of his economic policy, but campaigned for him based on issues such as global warming, abortion, and the Iraq War. On the other side nobody voting for the republicans because of their economic policy, but voted for them based on their morals, such as their pro-life stance. People connect to politics through their norms and values, not through bloated economic policy. 

Obama Budget Nearing Pass

The Senate will pass another inflated budget proposed by President Obama. The difference with this suggestion of a budget is that it was actually opposed by some democrats. But now it seems there is no way the budget plan does not pass. There are some things I really like about the proposed budget, such as more aid for college tuition, which I certainly could use. But after that I question why so much spending is necessary, especially as the country cuts back in so many other ways, the government just continues to spend.

Creating My Party

I feel creating my own party would be a real fun thing to do, but the most important thing about the party is that it is powerful, and compete in the federal government, which is why the previous party collapsed. Having a party that is able to compete would not be an easy thing to create, but it could be done by using some of the previous parties major players and platform. If it were to be the Republican Party that would collapse it would be important to find out who were the most important figures of that party and those with familiar names. A person I would want to get on my side would be Condoleezza Rice, simply because she is a big name, a women, a minority, and has power in the former party. Another important person in the Republican Party that I would bring along with me to the new party would be John McCain, the former candidate for president is important to have on my side, along with is experience in government would be essential to a new party. A thing I would consider the most important thing to do is to be able to appeal to the old members of the Republican Party, which would help create a base and establish votes. But because this is a new party, and we want to succeed, it would be essential to be able to pull more people that are undecided about their party affiliation. It would be important to appeal to people whom are moderates. To do this it would take some new faces that were not formerly Republicans, and in order to do this there would need to be a distance between the party of old and the new party. The new faces of the party would take time to become important and recognizable figures, but as soon as that would happen the party would be established. Even though it is terrible to wish bad upon the country, it would help if there would be screw ups on the behalf of the democrats, creating an opinion for the new party to establish an opposite stance, and give the people another choice to get their legislation passed. As far as the party I would create much of it would be based off of the old Republican Party, in order to pick up those votes and establish the party, at the same time some policy would change, and a focus would be put on national power, and establishing America again as the place to live and prosper.

Beauty Pagents and Politics?

What a very interesting combination of politics and beauty which we have witnessed during the miss USA pageant. I never thought a beauty pageant would create such a large controversy, but the topic of gay marriage presented itself, and Miss California took her stance. The whole reason I am writing about this is because it does have to do with party politics, because this is always a debate between the two major parties. The republicans in general favor that marriage should be between one man and one woman, and the democrats on the other hand feel it should be for all. I am not going to take either side to the argument in this post, but as far as equal rights for all people I feel the discrimination against Miss California should be addressed. 

People in America seem to flip out at every little thing that takes place in which a minority is discriminated against, or a homosexual feels they were discriminated against, but where are the rights to those people who feel the opposite, then voice their opinions and are discriminated for that. Miss California voiced her opinion and said what she truly believes, and it seems every liberal jumps on her for it when it is just he opposite of what they do in voice their opinions. I just feel it is time for people to respect people for who they are and not tear apart a persons feelings.

Diminishing Parties

For the question this week I really thought hard wondering if there was ever a way that the Republican party could ever be that completely useless that it could not even legitimately run for office of the presidency, or even be a factor in congress. The question posed is very intriguing, but is it really even realistic that a party which held majority in congress, and a two term president just years ago is now being even considered useless? I feel that the Republican party is far to large, and has much to big a history to just be forgotten about and considred as not being powerful. This is how government works, there is going to be a change in power, which is what makes how our government is set up so great. No one individual can become to strong, and along with that no one party can be too strong either. Although the way todays government is being run it may seem that a party is to strong, and not all people are being equally represented. In order to truly consider this a legitimate question we need to look at the broad picture of government, which as stated in the notes there has been a shifting of power. We also need to look at the nation as a whole, and just our state or our city, where democrats reign. When looking at the United States as a whole the republicans still hold power in key areas, and with holding such a power they can never be not considered a powerful party. They are one of the parties this country was built upon and without having these parties in our government the government essentially becomes useless because there is so much power handed to one group with one agenda. Because the democrats have been successful in gaining a majority in congress and winning the presidency is a great feat, but just another change in our government, one which is sure to reverse in years to come. 

Approval Rating and Partisan Politics

I saw an interesting article yesterday about the gap in approval rating of President Obama, between the Democrat and Republican parties. The gap between the two parties was 61 percent, which is one of the largest gaps of any new president over the past years. Although it is typical that a presidents rating would be significantly higher on the end of his own party, his is much higher than what is the norm. On the other end the Republican party has a significantly lower approval rating for President Obama, which is what makes the gap so large. Although as mentioned earlier this gap in presidential approval is normal, the question remains is this good for the country, especially is it good for a president campaigned about bi-partisan action in Washington?
For American citizens I feel it is necessary for there to be different parties, each with its own separate agenda. Although this divides the people, it also puts all citizens in a powerful position, because usually through a given party their individual feelings are covered to a point. An approval gap is going to happen, and to an extent it means the parties are doing their jobs. As far as for President Obama and this being a good or bad thing I really do not feel at this point it will directly affect him. When he took office there was so much distaste for the Republican party that the democrats can ride that for a good amount of time. President Obama has shut out the Republicans on occasion, which will help to contribute to this low rating from them. And as far as him promising bi-partisan action during his campaign I feel many people knew that statement was fluff, and would never actually take place. Those that truly believe that this was going to happen are naive and are still stuck back in Chicago after the President won the election, these are the people that need to get the stars out of their eyes and look at the facts.
The reason I chose to write about this is not only because I happened to stumble upon the article, but also because or blog is also supposed to talk about if we think the Republican party will someday not be able to compete on a national scale. Although I feel that this will not happen, I do feel it is realistic because of the way Republicans are not being listened to, and are being shut out from making important decisions.

Finally Some Smart Choices From Each Party

Obviously one of the largest concerns in politics today is the economy. The economy is very important, and not just here in The United States but also around the world as uncertainty mounts. With so much instability in the world it is essential that here in American we gain our footing today as well as for the future. Some of the past legislation being passed by Congress and then President Obama has put the country in a difficult and binding situation for years to come. A giant hole has been dug and has left us as college students, and someday our kids to dig us out of this seemingly ever deepening hole. The President has his own agenda in how to pull us out of this mess that is our economy and to that most democrats have agreed with his solution. On the other side their are the republicans who have been against his policy on the economy since day 1, but have not been able to shoot it down because of lack of numbers. So because of this some things have been passed which will place me and my children in some crazy amount of debt that will leave the nation unstable. In order to solve this their must be some bi-partisanship action in order to keep the spending in check.
Finally that bi-partisan action is taking place and the spending might finally come to halt. Democrats have now voiced their opinion, and have left the agenda of their party behind to stop another possible spending bill. They have looked at what would be the best thing for the nation and changed their way of thinking in order to reduce the amount of debt that has already been placed upon our shoulders. Moderate Democrats are realizing the best thing is to place the agenda aside and do what is right for the American people.
If they are finally taking a serious look at defeating some legislation that will make us dig deeper into the pit of debt we are in maybe it is also time to take a look at the Republican spending proposition that may benefit the country. The difference is that the legislation they wish to pass would never be passed, simply because they lack majority, as well as a president who would not think of passing it. Which I really cannot understand because it would cut taxes, and who could possibly complain about that. Maybe for President Obama it is time to take a harder look at what the American people feel is best for the country, after all they are the ones that voted him in. Also it is time to think like he did when proposing bi-partisan politics, and look at both parties for advice on governing this country.

Electoral Mandate & President Obama

Barack Obama did win the election last November and with that came many honors, and the privilege of running the country according to an agenda that he and his party agree upon. With the Democrats holding congress the legislation they wish to pass will be much easier with a Democratic president in office. With that the Democrats do hope that they have the backing of the American people who voted Obama into office as the try and pass the legislation. Hopes were high when President Obama took office that he would have the mandate to push ahead the agenda he feels is right for America.
The question does still reamain whether or not president President Obama has elecotral mandate? Yes he was voted into office by a fairly large majority of the citizens of the American people. This alone gives him some mandate simply because he was choosen by the people of America to be their leader. With this comes the responsibility of caring for the country, and along with that passing legislation that he believes will help the citizens of America. By being elected into office the American people have placed him as their figurehead, and have shown their support for them as their leader. Because the vote him as their leader they also in a sense vote for the policy he feels is best, which gives him that mandate.
Currently Barack Obama does still have mandate in the country because he is our elected leader. At the same time he does not hold all the power, and when the people stop backing him that mandate is no longer viable. He does not have the full support from the people and without that his power is limited. He loses that mandate. On the same token the amount of people who vote also has to be taken into consideration when thinking about what power the president actually has. Taking into consideration the lack of numbers when voting all people are not actually giving their backing to the elected official. In that sense the President does not hold a electoral mandate because he does not have the support of all people.

Exit Polls and Politics

What I feel exit polls do is they show how the American people felt about the former president and the party that he was affiliated with. It shows a lot of the time also how that president was perceived and what kind of job the American public thought of him. It also shows how the people look at the new president and the party that is exiting the White House along with the new one coming in.
While looking through the exit polls from the New York Times a couple of the questions along with their answers really caught my eye, although I felt as if all of the questions were relevant, and showed accurate thoughts of the American political system. The questions that caught my eye as listed in the link are questions 6, 7, and 8, but question 6 is one that really stood out to me. The people are asked in that question whether or not they think that President Obama is working with republicans well. And the overwhelming majority of the people have stated that they did feel as if the President was working very well with the Republicans in trying to include them in things. We see now that is the furthest from the truth because legislation has been passed with nearly none of the votes coming from the Republican party. I do not know how people can say that President Obama has worked well with Republicans when that is not the case at all. I think a lot of this still also stems from the fact that the Bush Adminstration had left the country in bad shape, and their is still resentment from people, which blinds them from the truth.
In questions 7 and 8 I feel that the party of the Bush Administration that being the Republican party is being looked down upon. The people feel as if the Republicans are doing nothing to work with the Democrats. This again I feel comes from the low approval rating which is still carrying over into todays policy and viewing on politics in American. Because on the other end of that people see the Democrats as working fairly well with the Repulicans. But that as well is not true, I do not understand how shutting out Republicans from a meeting on a billions of dollars stimulus bill is working well with the opposite party.
People need to stop being blinded by the celebrity that is the Democrat party, which is probably celebrity because so many pop-culture stars support it. It is time to see the facts and look pass the star power.

Less Troops not Cause of Attack

I really like how the White House has "dismissed suggestions that two recent bloody attacks in Iraq were a reaction to President Barack Obama's decision to pull out most combat troops by August next year."
Of course the President is going to come out and say that it is not because of the decision he has made that the people of Iraq are in more danger not to mention the troops that are still there. Now there is not really evidence saying that these attacks are directly correlated with the statement that troops will be pulling out of Iraq, but I sure do hope this is a wake up call. I hope it shows the people what they are actually facing with a pull out of troops from Iraq.
Not to mention there has been an increased level of violence in Afghanistan, showing that these countries are not stable for a even a change of command, let alone allowing a large number of troops to leave the area. The two countries are not in a stable condition, and giving up on them now would be disastrous.
The country is now in need for some bi-partisan legislation. The parties need to realize that the best thing for the country is to keep the world safe and in doing that keeping the country safe. In what seems to be a more an increasingly more violent world it is time for the parties to bond together and think in terms of the safety of the people they represent. With North Korea preparing to launch what could be a test missile, and at the same time threatening war to whoever threatens it, the world is getting more unsafe. With that we have a very new President who does not have much experience and is leading the country into some very uncertain times. We as a people need our elected officials to unite as one and help to protect this country rather than divide it down the middle over politics less important than our lives.

Link Post: War on Terror Bad Decisions

The more decisions President Obama makes the less confidence I have in him, it seems like every day he comes up with a new way to weaken the country. With all of the economic problems that are facing the country he continues to make bad choices, and is setting us up for even greater economic problems in the future. I just want to know when the star power of this man will fade away and people will start to realize he is inexperienced and is not making the changes that are for the better which he promised. The Bush administration would have been torn apart for saying some of the things Obama does and making those same decisions. Its time to take the halo off of President Obama and criticize him when necessary and stop praising him for his decisions.

Something that has been talked more recently is his policy towards "The War on Terror" which is a term he has clearly avoided. But now he is looking at pulling troops out of Iraq, but still leaving 50,000 of them there. What does that accomplish? It leaves those that are there less protected, but for some reason it pleases the people calling out for the war to end. He also talks about releasing the terrorists, which then what was the point of what the troops have previously accomplished. How can we let the protection of America lay by the side just to end the war, not to mention the safety of those troops fighting and erasing the accomplishments of those who have already died defending us.

The Republican party has to fight for those rights of the American people to be protected, to defend against another September 11th. At the same time they need to convince Democrats that they need to follow in the best interest of those that voted for them, question whether or not they truly would feel safe with terrorist released and the war stopped. They need to be convinced that defending this country is of the utmost importance so they can influence President Obama to reconsider what he has previously set as a timetable for removal. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTMyNTY5YTk1ZDJhOGY2MWI0NGE1ZmU3ZTgwYWZkODE=

United States Congress and The Minority Party

In congress their will be a party that becomes the minority, which makes it increasingly more difficult for that party to pass laws, and prevent the other party from acting upon their agenda. In our congress now as stated in the lecture notes the republican party is currently the minority, with the democrats then taking the majority. This majority from the democrats has helped President Obama immensely in passing his policy, including some major government stimulus package, which had little to no backing from the republican party. So then as the notes from class ask us what then really does the minority party do when it comes actually doing work.
I look at it like the minority party is there basically just to show their opposition, and give their reasons why. The minority party I think helps to inform the American people of what current policy or bill up for vote really contains, and usually points out the suspect portions of that bill which people may not support. What this then does is allow for the the people to openly voice their opinion, which could then result in more support against the bill than for it. From this activity against the bill the majority power could start to lose some of the members that are on the fence on an issue, and make them vote on the other side against their party. Also I feel the minority party is their because that is their job, they were voted into office many times because of what they stand for, now they have to stick to those morals that established and stand by the people who voted for them.
Where does this leave people then who are calling for bipartisanship? Well I feel they need to realize that bipartisanship really is not the best thing for the government. If everyone agrees on an issue I still feel you leave out some viewpoints of the American people. I also feel the country does not get fully informed of the true goings on in the government because they will on not take the time to be educated on the policy being discussed, but with an active group against what is being done they get informed of some of the negatives of the policy, which allows them to form an opinion.
We have seen much of this being done in the last months with Obama taking office and the majority of Congress being Democrats it is a great time for their policy to be passed, and it has happened quickly. At the same time the Republican minority in Congress have done a wonderful job of stating their opposition to the policy while also making sure to point out their reasons why. And now with more spending bills coming up their will be more promotion of it from the Democrats while the Republicans oppose.

Elections and the Internet

The Internet has changed the shape of the elections with candidates now having more outlets to put their name out there and gain recognition. With the the candidates having more press and giving more people the ability to recognize who they are and what they stand for, and more press time also means more votes. I think President Obama did a wonderful job of utilizing all outlets in his campaign this past year, and that alone really did increase his popularity and probably won him a lot of the younger tech-savy vote.
As far as candidates running a campaign that was based upon what their party thinks, and not necessarily according to what they believe I feel as if both candidates ran based more on their party. Recently John McCain came out and said he felt that he was more of a "puppet" for the party, rather than running the way he wanted to. I also feel in a way Obama ran a similar campaign based a lot upon what his party thought, but I also do feel he ran a campaign that seemed much more personal. I think he ran such a personal campaign because he had a large fan base on the internet and could connect with people on the internet, which automatically made them feel a personal touch much more from President Obama.
Remembering the Obama campaign I think he did follow the guidelines described by Teachout. He created a small community atmosphere on the internet, and brought people into his personal life, he connected with them on many levels. I think he did the same thing by allowing magazines like People and US come into his home and photograph him and his family, showing that they are just a normal family which is what every American can connect with.

Pull Out From Iraq

Iraq was a major point of the previous election, and was probably a large reason why President Obama gained so much support from much of the country. His promises to pull troops out of Iraq within months was something much of the country wanted to hear, and because he said it they believed and bought it. Now Obama has moved that pullout of troops time from 16 months to 19 months from his inauguration, a decision I feel is one of the better ones he has made while in office. Now I do not feel that it is the best idea to take troops out of Iraq and leave it to waver as a new country and new government. I feel the troops need to be there until the job is done, and these three extra months may allow for Obama to continue to rethink his choice and possibly notice the importance of the troops being there.
Because this was such an important topic of the recent election it is clearly an important topic in all of party politics, which at this time in the country is being looked over by the economic crisis and the inflated stimulus bill, but the troops and the country of Iraq cannot afford to be overlooked. Members from each party need to evaluate what state Iraq is in, and whether or not they truly feel the country can be left to monitor itself, and become a country not ruled by terrorism. Each party cannot allow their party lines separate them from what the feel is right, and allow a thinning of troops in Iraq endanger the Americans serving their, not only that but protecting what those brave soldiers have already accomplished.
Now if the country is ready to rule itself, and protect itself against an insecure area, and one riddled with terrorist groups. The troops have done a magnificent job bringing Iraq to the state it has become, and hopefully one day soon all the troops can leave there and come back home safe, but until then they need to continue to serve their country like they have, and those of us fortunate enough to be safe here need to support them.

Elections

Finance has everything to do with everything. How money is handed out to given representatives is extremely important to those candidates seeking election. In many ways it determines how frequently and effectively they can get their name out there to the public, and just having your name out there can help produce results in many ways.
I do not understand the point of trying to regulate the money being spent on elections, I say if they can raise it why not spend it. Today with much of the money being spent coming from individual donations why should a candidate have to limit how they spend that money. I see the importance of having the money be accounted for, and do think it is important for the candidate to list where the money came from, but as far as limiting the funds they can use it doesn't help either party. I also feel that political action committees having less influence may be a good thing. With more individuals having put the money towards a campaign the person being elected has less influence from outside sources which could mean a more beneficial agenda for the general public if that person is elected.
Partisan politics is effected by the donations from more individuals and less from the party in that the candidate may feel less obligated to the party because in a sense they didn't help out as much to accomplish what the individual did. With money coming from all over the place the candidate will feel more obligated to push the agenda of the people rather than of their party. This can create less loyal parties, but also can benefit the people, because that elected official may more likely be working for them than for their parties agenda. http://www.fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/mapApp.do

Passing the Bill without Party Support

The Stimulus bill just passed and from my previous post I'm sure it is quite obvious I do not feel it was a great idea. But it was a rather large mistake passing it without support from each party. The decision to pass the bill was so rushed that many people did not even get a chance to read it, and comprehend what it all contained. What it also did was put a even greater division between the parties that existed before.
So far in the Obama presidency the term bi-partisanship has been on display, and was a major part of his election campaign focusing on how important it would be to have each party cooperating to accomplish things.
What the stimulus bill being passed did was prove that each party approving of the bill didn't matter. The republicans opposed to the bill were shut out of the meeting, and did not have any input in what the bill contained, and could not stop it from being passed. This is where party politics has failed. Each party is not represented, meaning half of Americans are not represented. With one party not being allowed to even participate the party system has not accomplished its purpose, and certainly Obama has failed at bi-partisanship.
Article-Obama's tainted Win

Decentralization and Party Politcs

In the United States we think of party politics as being 2 main parties, but it is so much more. There are so many different views a person can have, and it is nearly impossible for each person to be completely represented. People are different all across the country, have their own opinions, and what this does is decentralize these parties, and almost creates completely different parties. What this then leads to is members of a given party being less loyal to a major party, therefore making that party less effective. With less effectiveness each party will struggle to strive towards their goals, and much of the agenda will not be met all because the party is not strong enough. So with people crossing party lines and not fully backing those people of their party they have weakened their party, and left them struggling. President Obama pushing for this "reaching across the isle", party politics lose what they have stood for, and lose the loyalty of their members. So many people are praising those who crossover the party lines and join with a new party, but is that what their voters really wanted them to do. Many times if you voted for somebody you have voted for their party as much as the person, and expect them to back their party and remain loyal to that party. Throughout the entire process of the previous election we heard about bipartisanship, and how important it would be in the coming years to get things accomplished. But where does it leave the party in that situation? Parties are left useless when crossing the isle occurs, which makes me wonder who the leaders of the parties are, and what are their jobs.
Here is the link that i posted earlier in the post. It talks about how people are excited that republicans are backing the stimulus plan, and praises them from crossing over, but where does it leave the rest of their party, that which they were elected because of. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/08/liberal-group-praises-crossover-republicans-minority-leaders-balk-partisanship/

The Stimulus Bill

For so many reasons this Stimulus bill is ridiculous. Passing it is a huge mistake, and many people, that are so blinded by the President and his charm, will not realize it for 2 more years. The reason is because that is when all of this money proposed to be given to all the amazingly dumb things it will be used for, such as an amazing amount for over the top building repairs that could be put on hold for now. Not only that but 2 years from now we will have pulled ourselves out of this recession and picked back up on our feet, only to have all this money finally be handed out causing an amazing amount of inflation, great idea. And many have read in multiple newspapers how the Milwaukee school district is about to get 90 million dollars, and for what to close more school buildings, and fire more teachers. I am not against providing money for education, I shouldn't be I want to become a teacher, but 90 million for a school district in shambles and with no future plans?
This was not supposed to ramble on about education, but more the medical end of the stimulus bill, which is so long that nobody really recognizes all the provisions that are contained in it. Throughout the article so many things need to be thought about again. All with doctors all giving same health care based on certain guidelines, and possibly fearing going overboard, nobody will benefit. Also giving more money to hospitals than to soldiers fighting a war to keep this country safe and free, as well as other countries safe and free. So many things about this bill just don't add up, if President Obama thinks not passing could lead to disaster wait till we see the disaster that could come from passing it as is. If the parties want to come together they need to come together and make changes to the stimulus plan. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_mccaughey&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs

Federalist 51, 10, and Farewell Address

I think after reading these given articles it is more evident that party politics is essential to American and Democratic politics. Each reading gave more examples of how important it is that these parties exist, even if it was not always specifically spelled out. Party politics are key to the running of our government and to the balance in which the government was based upon. Both the Federalist 10 and the Federalist 51 talk about the balance of power in the government, and also through this balance of power all American Citizens will be represented. I feel as though through these party politics the checks and balances talked about in both Federalist 10 as well as 51 are achieved. Through parties, such as Democratic and Republican parties, each person has their views represented. Each party represents something, a view on a given topic or an opinion on government spending, they also can help reflect the values of the people. There are obviously more than just the Democrats and the Republicans participating in politics but those two major groups help reflect the views of the people they represent, and through voting, and typically disagreeing the powers of the government are checked.

To go along with this the farewell address both acknowledge that party politics is important to America and the system of government. Many times Delay referenced the other party, and said though not always getting along it still helped the government be better for the people of America. So the different parties with different agenda is important to the balance of the government and the process which has been laid out for us and worked for so many years. Through party politics the American people can voice their opinions, and run their government, through elected officials.

Global Warming and Party Politics

After reading the Tom Delay's farewell address he made many references to the different parties and them working together. I just stumbled upon this article today and it kind of reminded me of the farewell address. Neither of the two things have anything to do with one another one being an article about global warming and the other a farewell letter upon retirement. The only reason it reminded me of the other was the joking about parties coming together and working with one another towards same goal. They also make a big joke of the groups coming together and feeling as if it will never happen where the two major parties can ever agree, but over certain things they can, and that mostly comes when they all disagree with an outrageous claim or coming together to honor someone. The article comes from the National Review website, and was written by Deroy Murdock. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2RlNDFjZDNjNzdkYzBjMGUxNTA0ZDlmYTZlM2VjMTY=

About Me

My name is Jordan Lorenz and I am really looking forward to this Poli Sci Class, I think it should be very interesting. The reason I am excited is because party politics is what dominates our country today, and governs how people react to policy and a particular party can influence the general public in so many ways. I also think that people associate with their party, to the death in some cases, and because of that will defend the party as well. I think this could create some great debate in the class which can really help learning about politics in many ways. Should be a very interesting semester. My biggest fear is whether or not I did this whole blog thing correctly so I guess I will find that out soon enough.

I am from Madison WI, and have been in school here for 2 years, and began my college career at MSOE. I enjoy politics and history and am studying to become a teacher in high school.

Here is a small article I really enjoyed from cnn.com I am setting this up as a link because I don't think that Former President Bush got enough respect, it shows that he did accomplish something in office, and something very important. http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/15/frist.bush/