The experience I had on eBay was definitely not what I expected, and I think it's somewhat my fault. When I was bidding on the item (an anime pin), I did not even wait til the last minute or seconds. I just placed my bid, and checked every few hours. The reason why I said it was not what I expected is because I did not have any competition. I was the only one that bid on it, and I won with the minimal price. I did not get the full experience of the market, because I did not have to compete with anyone. It was almost as though I just used the "Buy Now" button. But I guess this demonstrates if the demand is low, the price will low as well.
My experience on eBay enforced the discussions we had in class about how, in capitalism, it is "the rich white man" is the one that is getting even more money. The item that I bid on was roughly around $5, and this five dollars is what the seller is getting. But then there was also shipping and handling, which was around $8(but it probably wasn't worth $8). eBay was the one who made the most money between this trade, just by being the middle man. They receive money from the seller and the fees that they have to pay, as well as the fees that are accounted into the PayPal system. This demonstrates how the rich people, who has the money to set up this whole site and to buy off PayPal, are the ones who are getting even richer. eBay is perfect example of one of those "rich white men," and the seller and I are pretty much like the people who work for that guy (but rather than putting in our efforts, we're putting in our money and item).
eBay reveals to us that people who live the AWOL kind of expects to get something, but without them having to put any effort into it. Within the eBay community there are two groups of people who demonstrate this: the buyers and eBay itself. In class, we were introduced to J-Bid, which is a program that many people use in order to win auctions on eBay. This program allows people to just place in their bids, and then at the last three seconds the program automatically bids for the user until the amount that they entered. J-Bid is one example of how Americans just sit there and wait til something great falls into their hands. Another example is the eBay company. As I mentioned before, eBay is earning money because they are simply the connection between the buyer and seller. By hosting a website where people can buy and sell things online, they are gaining money. The company isn't really doing much work in order to earn that money. Both scenarios show that the AWOL is filled with expected, but undeserved wealth. Through eBay and capitalism we can see a clear imbalance in the value of each person's work.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Part D: Thinking Further
Given the distinction between a constitutional amendment and a law - if you had the influence how would you amend the constitution?
A law is a rule or principal created by the local, state or federal government. They are the bills that have been passed. Amongst laws, the Constitution is "the highest law of the land," which was made by the federal government. And the constitutional amendments are revisions to the original version of those specific set of laws. And while laws can be made by any of the three governments, the amendments can only be made by federal government.
If I had the influence, I would eliminate the 12th amendment, which states that the person with the most electoral votes would become president. This amendment draws America further away from a true democracy. Electoral votes covers up each individual's voice with the dominating point of view. Democracy is supposed to be government by the people, but in America it's people voting for people to be part of the government. And with electoral votes, it is not even people voting, it's the majority of each state. Therefore all the people who do not have the mainstream perspective are not being represented by their president. In addition, if we did not have this amendment, Bush would not have won the 2004 election and caused America to become such a mess.
What is the general tendency of the Constitution and Amendments in your view - general and steady expansion of human freedom and decency? ...
I think that the Constitution was originally written with the government being it's only priority. It's main purpose was to set up the government and divide the powers amongst the three branches. In the 7 articles of the Constitution it does not mention anything about the people. It only discusses what the government can and cannot do. When the government began to write the Amendments, I think they were trying to appeal more to the people. They were attempting to fulfill that part of the Preamble that says "in order to form a more perfect union." The government began to consider the people and follow the Preamble and its goals. In some ways, the Constitution did improve in order to expand human freedom and decency, but that is only because it was limited by the government and society to begin with.
The Constitution and Amendments do not reverse or contradict in any particular direction. In some ways the Constitution did improve and in some ways it changed in order to make America less of a democracy. As I mentioned before, having the 12th Amendment and Electoral votes betray the idea of democracy. Even so, the Amendments did improve America in some ways. It caused America to start a slow process of becoming more and more accepting. While the Amendments were created and the Constitution was being revised, there wasn't one direction that it was heading in terms of improving.
To say that the Constitution and Amendments are a documentation of the battle against good and bad is invalid. "Good" and "bad" cannot really be judged. Although freedom and rights for the people is commonly known to be good, it could be that if the people are given too much rights they will take advantage of it. So in that case, limiting the people's freedom would be consider to be good. For example, Amendment 2 states: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." This is definitely a right given to the people, but it may not be the best for the people. It is impossible to determine what is good and bad. And perhaps the American society is just all bad, and that the Constitution is a record of bad against the worse.
How does the Constitution, as amended, create/constrain/shape the American Way of Life?
The freedom give by Constitution shaped the American Way of Life. In America, people are more expressive about their thoughts and feelings, unlike other countries where people get arrested for saying something that does not appeal to the government, such as North Korea. This is to due to the 1st Amendment, that gives the the freedom of the speech and the press. This might also be the reason why Americans tend to be somewhat more rebellious. We take advantage of that right and abuse it as much as possible.
The Constitution also made the people living in America more open-minded. The freedom that it provides welcomed people from other countries to immigrate over to America. People around the world were lured into America because they wanted rights that were not given to them in their home country. Therefore it opened a door to diversity. Americans were surrounded by people of many different backgrounds. Everyone had their own values, and people accepted the differences within those values.
The diversity in America leads to the next trait that the Constitution created as part of the American way of life, which is laziness. Since people have different values, they also settle for less. Some people are glad that they are able to live in a country where they can have a home and raise a family. Therefore they do no aim to become the top or to become rich. So instead those people who value money and aim for those goals (usually the people who are already rich) use them as cheap labor. So while the rich guy is just sitting there, being lazy and getting even richer, the immigrants are working extremely hard in order to maintain their "simple" life.
The Constitution started something that appears to be good and shape the AWOL in a positive way. It encouraged expression and diversity. In addition, being the humans that we are, the people abused it. The freedom of speech gave us the freedom to rebel. The whole Constitution itself provided us the opportunity to use one of the Dark Methods, making us lazy and rich at the same time. The Constitution was, according to the Preamble, written to "form a more perfect union, establish justice..." And in some ways it did. In other ways it made America, a nation of rich slackers and poor workers. This does not apply for everyone, but there is certainly an imbalance between the rich and the poor, and the Constitution encourages this, either intentionally or unintentionally.
A law is a rule or principal created by the local, state or federal government. They are the bills that have been passed. Amongst laws, the Constitution is "the highest law of the land," which was made by the federal government. And the constitutional amendments are revisions to the original version of those specific set of laws. And while laws can be made by any of the three governments, the amendments can only be made by federal government.
If I had the influence, I would eliminate the 12th amendment, which states that the person with the most electoral votes would become president. This amendment draws America further away from a true democracy. Electoral votes covers up each individual's voice with the dominating point of view. Democracy is supposed to be government by the people, but in America it's people voting for people to be part of the government. And with electoral votes, it is not even people voting, it's the majority of each state. Therefore all the people who do not have the mainstream perspective are not being represented by their president. In addition, if we did not have this amendment, Bush would not have won the 2004 election and caused America to become such a mess.
What is the general tendency of the Constitution and Amendments in your view - general and steady expansion of human freedom and decency? ...
I think that the Constitution was originally written with the government being it's only priority. It's main purpose was to set up the government and divide the powers amongst the three branches. In the 7 articles of the Constitution it does not mention anything about the people. It only discusses what the government can and cannot do. When the government began to write the Amendments, I think they were trying to appeal more to the people. They were attempting to fulfill that part of the Preamble that says "in order to form a more perfect union." The government began to consider the people and follow the Preamble and its goals. In some ways, the Constitution did improve in order to expand human freedom and decency, but that is only because it was limited by the government and society to begin with.
The Constitution and Amendments do not reverse or contradict in any particular direction. In some ways the Constitution did improve and in some ways it changed in order to make America less of a democracy. As I mentioned before, having the 12th Amendment and Electoral votes betray the idea of democracy. Even so, the Amendments did improve America in some ways. It caused America to start a slow process of becoming more and more accepting. While the Amendments were created and the Constitution was being revised, there wasn't one direction that it was heading in terms of improving.
To say that the Constitution and Amendments are a documentation of the battle against good and bad is invalid. "Good" and "bad" cannot really be judged. Although freedom and rights for the people is commonly known to be good, it could be that if the people are given too much rights they will take advantage of it. So in that case, limiting the people's freedom would be consider to be good. For example, Amendment 2 states: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." This is definitely a right given to the people, but it may not be the best for the people. It is impossible to determine what is good and bad. And perhaps the American society is just all bad, and that the Constitution is a record of bad against the worse.
How does the Constitution, as amended, create/constrain/shape the American Way of Life?
The freedom give by Constitution shaped the American Way of Life. In America, people are more expressive about their thoughts and feelings, unlike other countries where people get arrested for saying something that does not appeal to the government, such as North Korea. This is to due to the 1st Amendment, that gives the the freedom of the speech and the press. This might also be the reason why Americans tend to be somewhat more rebellious. We take advantage of that right and abuse it as much as possible.
The Constitution also made the people living in America more open-minded. The freedom that it provides welcomed people from other countries to immigrate over to America. People around the world were lured into America because they wanted rights that were not given to them in their home country. Therefore it opened a door to diversity. Americans were surrounded by people of many different backgrounds. Everyone had their own values, and people accepted the differences within those values.
The diversity in America leads to the next trait that the Constitution created as part of the American way of life, which is laziness. Since people have different values, they also settle for less. Some people are glad that they are able to live in a country where they can have a home and raise a family. Therefore they do no aim to become the top or to become rich. So instead those people who value money and aim for those goals (usually the people who are already rich) use them as cheap labor. So while the rich guy is just sitting there, being lazy and getting even richer, the immigrants are working extremely hard in order to maintain their "simple" life.
The Constitution started something that appears to be good and shape the AWOL in a positive way. It encouraged expression and diversity. In addition, being the humans that we are, the people abused it. The freedom of speech gave us the freedom to rebel. The whole Constitution itself provided us the opportunity to use one of the Dark Methods, making us lazy and rich at the same time. The Constitution was, according to the Preamble, written to "form a more perfect union, establish justice..." And in some ways it did. In other ways it made America, a nation of rich slackers and poor workers. This does not apply for everyone, but there is certainly an imbalance between the rich and the poor, and the Constitution encourages this, either intentionally or unintentionally.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Part C: Articles 11-27
Amendments 12, 13, 14, & 15 are often referred to as a major turning point in US government policy. Explain the importance of these amendments.
These amendments are known to be major turning point in the US government policy because it created more possibilities for the people. Amendments 12-15 affected the whole voting system by changing the requirements for being an eligible voter. These changes made an impact on the presidents we have had throughout history. Every group of people have different desires, and by allowing those group of people to vote, there will be different outcomes of the presidential elections, as opposed to allowing one group of people vote. Amendments 12, 14 and 15 all contributed to the shape of our voting system and therefore affected the shape of our country as well.
The amendments did not only affected the US government, but it is also significant to the American lifestyle. Amendment 13 obviously plays a big role in shaping our country today as well. If slavery was not abolished, the mindset of an average American would change. We would not be the people who "believe" in equality. America would also be a lot more prejudice to certain races as well, rather than being the diverse country it is today. The significance of this amendment was not that slaves were freed (since the slaves were still at a dead end, even when they were "freed"). The significance of this amendment was that it gives people around the world the idea the America is absolutely a country of freedom and equality. After this message sent out there, America slowly became what it is today.
Does the 14th combine with the earlier "no religious test" clause to guarantee a vision of a diverse and equitable society with no government discrimination?
I believe that it does not guarantee that vision, but it does help promote it. Regardless of what the Constitution or Amendments say, there will always be some sort of judgment based on religion and race. People will have their own thoughts and there wouldn't be a single law that can prevent discrimination. However I do think that the two laws combined is helpful in creating a more diverse and equitable society, but then again if a society is to be filled with people that are truly accepting there wouldn't be laws that addresses the diversity of religion or race.
Part 6:
Out of all the amendments between Amendment 16-27, I think that the 13th Amendment was the most powerful and changed America the most. As I mentioned before, abolishing slavery caused America to become more diverse and welcome more people of different races. But in addition, by ending slavery it also changed the economic system in America as well. If there was still slavery today, the gap between the rich and the poor would be even greater, due to the free labor. Ending slavery prevented this economical difference. The other amendment were significant but Amendment 13 was able to shape the economy that we have today and the mindset of Americans.
These amendments are known to be major turning point in the US government policy because it created more possibilities for the people. Amendments 12-15 affected the whole voting system by changing the requirements for being an eligible voter. These changes made an impact on the presidents we have had throughout history. Every group of people have different desires, and by allowing those group of people to vote, there will be different outcomes of the presidential elections, as opposed to allowing one group of people vote. Amendments 12, 14 and 15 all contributed to the shape of our voting system and therefore affected the shape of our country as well.
The amendments did not only affected the US government, but it is also significant to the American lifestyle. Amendment 13 obviously plays a big role in shaping our country today as well. If slavery was not abolished, the mindset of an average American would change. We would not be the people who "believe" in equality. America would also be a lot more prejudice to certain races as well, rather than being the diverse country it is today. The significance of this amendment was not that slaves were freed (since the slaves were still at a dead end, even when they were "freed"). The significance of this amendment was that it gives people around the world the idea the America is absolutely a country of freedom and equality. After this message sent out there, America slowly became what it is today.
Does the 14th combine with the earlier "no religious test" clause to guarantee a vision of a diverse and equitable society with no government discrimination?
I believe that it does not guarantee that vision, but it does help promote it. Regardless of what the Constitution or Amendments say, there will always be some sort of judgment based on religion and race. People will have their own thoughts and there wouldn't be a single law that can prevent discrimination. However I do think that the two laws combined is helpful in creating a more diverse and equitable society, but then again if a society is to be filled with people that are truly accepting there wouldn't be laws that addresses the diversity of religion or race.
Part 6:
Out of all the amendments between Amendment 16-27, I think that the 13th Amendment was the most powerful and changed America the most. As I mentioned before, abolishing slavery caused America to become more diverse and welcome more people of different races. But in addition, by ending slavery it also changed the economic system in America as well. If there was still slavery today, the gap between the rich and the poor would be even greater, due to the free labor. Ending slavery prevented this economical difference. The other amendment were significant but Amendment 13 was able to shape the economy that we have today and the mindset of Americans.
Monday, December 1, 2008
Thanksgiving/Buy Nothing Day/ Black Friday and Wal-Mart Worker Trampling Analysis
During this Thanksgiving vacation I did not do much, since Chinese families do not celebrate this holiday (at least not my family). I think that is mainly because it's more like an American holiday and because there isn't any real meaning to Thanksgiving. Most people say that Thanksgiving is a holiday to be thankful for what you have. But I do not know why you would need a holiday for that, and neither does my family. This holiday reveals that the American Way of Life requires some sort of reason or reward for doing anything. In this case, you would need a feast in order to appreciate the people and life that you have. The economic system and the lifestyle in America ties together almost perfectly: give in order to get. In America, it is a rare to have people doing something for the sake of doing it. There has to be some sort of self-satisfaction, whether it in shape of a gift, money, return-service, tax-reduction, etc.
Before Wednesday's class, I never heard of Buy Nothing Day. And honestly I think it will not have much of an effect. I think that people in America are far too greedy to participate in such an event. First of all, not enough people will know or care about this since it will not appeal to their interest. As mentioned before, Americans require some sort of reward in order to even listen. Another thing is that this event is telling people to not buy anything on the greatest sale of every year. Maybe if it took place at another date, perhaps there will be a few more participants. And even if there were more people that actually bought nothing on Buy Nothing Day, I still do not think it will help much. Eventually people will buy what they want and need regardless. Buy Nothing Day is just delaying the time that they buy it and increasing the amount of money they pay for it.
Black Friday is a very big event where every store in America has sales. Everyone starts camping out in front of the stores days in advance. Every year, Black Friday continues to reveal and emphacize on the greed of Americans. People would do anything to save a couple of bucks (which they're going to spend buying more stuff anyways). This year a man in Wal-Mart was trampled to death because people were rushing in the store. When there are sales that is the only thing that the people see. They do not notice the 6'5 man fall down and that they're walking all over him. It doesn't matter, as long as they get into the store the fastest. I think Black Friday takes off the good-guy mask off of everyone. The people are now willing to take that mask off because they are going to rewarded with a massive sale.
An extra thought I have about Black Friday: There is one thing I do not understand why people do not understand. There are 3 things that are being sacrificed during this event: money, time and the safety of any person. Money, you can always get back. But time, you cannot. Now if the person dies (which did happen this year), you cannot get that back either. So my question is, why are people willing to sacrifice 2 things you can never get back in order to save something that you can always get back?
Before Wednesday's class, I never heard of Buy Nothing Day. And honestly I think it will not have much of an effect. I think that people in America are far too greedy to participate in such an event. First of all, not enough people will know or care about this since it will not appeal to their interest. As mentioned before, Americans require some sort of reward in order to even listen. Another thing is that this event is telling people to not buy anything on the greatest sale of every year. Maybe if it took place at another date, perhaps there will be a few more participants. And even if there were more people that actually bought nothing on Buy Nothing Day, I still do not think it will help much. Eventually people will buy what they want and need regardless. Buy Nothing Day is just delaying the time that they buy it and increasing the amount of money they pay for it.
Black Friday is a very big event where every store in America has sales. Everyone starts camping out in front of the stores days in advance. Every year, Black Friday continues to reveal and emphacize on the greed of Americans. People would do anything to save a couple of bucks (which they're going to spend buying more stuff anyways). This year a man in Wal-Mart was trampled to death because people were rushing in the store. When there are sales that is the only thing that the people see. They do not notice the 6'5 man fall down and that they're walking all over him. It doesn't matter, as long as they get into the store the fastest. I think Black Friday takes off the good-guy mask off of everyone. The people are now willing to take that mask off because they are going to rewarded with a massive sale.
An extra thought I have about Black Friday: There is one thing I do not understand why people do not understand. There are 3 things that are being sacrificed during this event: money, time and the safety of any person. Money, you can always get back. But time, you cannot. Now if the person dies (which did happen this year), you cannot get that back either. So my question is, why are people willing to sacrifice 2 things you can never get back in order to save something that you can always get back?
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Part B Consitution Work: Articles 4-7
Article IV: Paraphrase the “Full Faith & Credit” provision. What does that mean for gay marriage? Explain. Paraphrase the amended portion that begins, “No person held to … may be due.” Why does this matter?
"Full Faith & Credit" provision is stating that any laws written in a certain state has to be respected by all the other states. So if a gay couple gets married in a certain state, they will remain married even if they move to a different state. This provision has the potential to legalize gay marriage throughout the whole America, even if just one state allows gay marriages. Any gay couple can go to that one state to get married and then return to their home state.
In clause 3 of section 2, it states that slaves running away to another state does not free them. Any fugitives would have to return to their original states and continue working. The significance of this clause is that without it, there would probably be less of a difference in economical classes. If slavery could be abolished simply by the slaves running away, then the free labor that created the economical gap would disappear. This clause also reveals the dark side of the United States. America is supposed to be the country of freedom and equality, but then we had slavery in our country for centuries. And not only that, there was a part of our Constitution that prevented them from getting freedom. So not only did the slaves have to work without any wages, any chance of escaping and obtaining freedom was eliminated by a document that is suppose to be about the rights of "the people."
Article VI: What is the Supreme Law of the Land? What is the significance, in your opinion, of the “No religious test” clause?
The Supreme Law of the Land is just another name for the Constitution. It is referring to all the laws that everyone in the United States have to follow. In Article 6, Section 3 it states that "no religious test" is required. I believe that the significance of that is not to truly eliminate any sort of filtering in the government office because of one's religion. Instead I think it is used to promote a sense of equality. By including this "no religious test," it sends a message to the people, saying that everyone is welcomed and that no one will be discriminated based on their background (and this is true, but only to a certain extent). I think that this clause was written not to draw in people to create a diverse government but draw in the people and to gain their trust.
Amendment 4: Is the 4th Amendment contradicted by MTA, library, and/or airport searches?
I believe that it is. The fourth amendment states that the people have the rights to privacy and any evidence that was illegally obtained is not allowed to be used in a court against them. By having these searches, they are violating that amendment. The people doing the searches are invading the privacy of others. And even if they find evidence that they are holding something illegal, they are not supposed to use the found object as evidence. The searches may be necessary since it's there to prevent any attacks against the United states, but it does contradict the fourth amendment.
Amendment 9: What do the 9th remind us about where rights ultimately come from? Are they given by government? What are some of the “others retained by the people” in your opinion? Is abortion one of them?
Our rights stated in the first 10 amendments do not come from the government or the Constitution itself. It is just our rights as humans. By existing, we are supposed to have the right to do whatever we want. Society and forms of government were just created to limit those rights. So even though, we are given this "freedom" in America, we are really just being less restricted.
I think that the "others retained by the people" are rights of the people. For example, the freedom of speech or religion. I think that abortion is one of those rights. In the Constitution it does not mention anything about abortion therefore it is a right of the people, but yet it is still prohibited.
"Full Faith & Credit" provision is stating that any laws written in a certain state has to be respected by all the other states. So if a gay couple gets married in a certain state, they will remain married even if they move to a different state. This provision has the potential to legalize gay marriage throughout the whole America, even if just one state allows gay marriages. Any gay couple can go to that one state to get married and then return to their home state.
In clause 3 of section 2, it states that slaves running away to another state does not free them. Any fugitives would have to return to their original states and continue working. The significance of this clause is that without it, there would probably be less of a difference in economical classes. If slavery could be abolished simply by the slaves running away, then the free labor that created the economical gap would disappear. This clause also reveals the dark side of the United States. America is supposed to be the country of freedom and equality, but then we had slavery in our country for centuries. And not only that, there was a part of our Constitution that prevented them from getting freedom. So not only did the slaves have to work without any wages, any chance of escaping and obtaining freedom was eliminated by a document that is suppose to be about the rights of "the people."
Article VI: What is the Supreme Law of the Land? What is the significance, in your opinion, of the “No religious test” clause?
The Supreme Law of the Land is just another name for the Constitution. It is referring to all the laws that everyone in the United States have to follow. In Article 6, Section 3 it states that "no religious test" is required. I believe that the significance of that is not to truly eliminate any sort of filtering in the government office because of one's religion. Instead I think it is used to promote a sense of equality. By including this "no religious test," it sends a message to the people, saying that everyone is welcomed and that no one will be discriminated based on their background (and this is true, but only to a certain extent). I think that this clause was written not to draw in people to create a diverse government but draw in the people and to gain their trust.
Amendment 4: Is the 4th Amendment contradicted by MTA, library, and/or airport searches?
I believe that it is. The fourth amendment states that the people have the rights to privacy and any evidence that was illegally obtained is not allowed to be used in a court against them. By having these searches, they are violating that amendment. The people doing the searches are invading the privacy of others. And even if they find evidence that they are holding something illegal, they are not supposed to use the found object as evidence. The searches may be necessary since it's there to prevent any attacks against the United states, but it does contradict the fourth amendment.
Amendment 9: What do the 9th remind us about where rights ultimately come from? Are they given by government? What are some of the “others retained by the people” in your opinion? Is abortion one of them?
Our rights stated in the first 10 amendments do not come from the government or the Constitution itself. It is just our rights as humans. By existing, we are supposed to have the right to do whatever we want. Society and forms of government were just created to limit those rights. So even though, we are given this "freedom" in America, we are really just being less restricted.
I think that the "others retained by the people" are rights of the people. For example, the freedom of speech or religion. I think that abortion is one of those rights. In the Constitution it does not mention anything about abortion therefore it is a right of the people, but yet it is still prohibited.
Part A Consitution Work: Articles 1-3
The Preamble states the Constitution was created in order to make America as a whole, better for the people. And if it is followed properly, it will create a society where the people and their freedom are protected. The Preamble is simply saying that the Constitution will change America into an ideal and justified place for the people to live.
Article I LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
- Divided into 2 parts in order to create a balance: House of Representatives and Senate
- Most responsive to the people
- Representatives represents their own state
- Is able to limit the president by deciding on the speaker
- Have the ability to impeach the president
- Congress is required to meet with the President on January 3
- Decide on punishments and penalties
- Must keep journal
- House of Representatives start tax bills
- Congress can override the President's veto if 2/3 agree upon it
- Congress can borrow money
- Have the power to create clear, simple system of trade
- Regulates land and navy
- Create laws, as well as rules for the government
- Congress controls how immigrants become citizens and how to deal with bankruptcies
- Congress is also able to control: the value of money, the mail system, technological studies, lower courts
- Able to declare war
- Create and regulate armies
Article II EXECUTIVE BRANCH
- The President is required to swear oath to the Constitution
- President becomes the commander in chief of both the navy and the army
- Is able to grant pardons
- Has to give a state of Union address occasionally
- Adjourn Congress if 2 houses are divided about it
- Receive ambassadors and commission officers
- It is the president's duty to make sure the laws of the US are faithfully executed
Article III JUDICIAL BRANCH
- Have to maintain their “good behavior” and judgments (therefore their salary cannot be reduced during their term)
- The Supreme Court handles cases involving the Constitution, federal laws, treaties and diplomatic officials, international cases between the US and another country, between 2 states(no longer applies; restricted in 1795 by the 11th amendment)/ citizens of 2 states.
- Is able to appeal judgments of lower courts
- First ones to hear and decide cases (foreign ambassadors and individual states)
While I was doing this assignment, I did not have any feelings towards the work. I just felt like it was just a part of what we were supposed to do as students. But in terms of the information that I learned, I felt somewhat annoyed. I was annoyed that we did not study the actual Constitution when we were learning about it earlier in middle school. In addition, studying this made me realized the contradiction between the Preamble and the condition we are in today, and that aggravated me as well.
Five Insights/Questions
1) Although the Preamble states that the Constitution was written "in order to form a more perfect union," it appears that it creates a separation between the people and the government. The Constitution actually aids the government more and give them more power, while in the Preamble it made it seem like it would benefit the people.
2) Are we following the Constitution to its full intentions? Why or why not?
3) Why is it that there are so many specifications in Article 1: Judicial Branch? Does it have to do with it being the most responsive to the people?
4) How does the government revise the Constitution? What process do they have to go through in order to change the original clauses? Is this process similar to how a bill becomes a law?
5) How can a country truly be just and "establish justice", if a judge's salary is their source of good behavior and good judgment?
Article I LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
- Divided into 2 parts in order to create a balance: House of Representatives and Senate
- Most responsive to the people
- Representatives represents their own state
- Is able to limit the president by deciding on the speaker
- Have the ability to impeach the president
- Congress is required to meet with the President on January 3
- Decide on punishments and penalties
- Must keep journal
- House of Representatives start tax bills
- Congress can override the President's veto if 2/3 agree upon it
- Congress can borrow money
- Have the power to create clear, simple system of trade
- Regulates land and navy
- Create laws, as well as rules for the government
- Congress controls how immigrants become citizens and how to deal with bankruptcies
- Congress is also able to control: the value of money, the mail system, technological studies, lower courts
- Able to declare war
- Create and regulate armies
Article II EXECUTIVE BRANCH
- The President is required to swear oath to the Constitution
- President becomes the commander in chief of both the navy and the army
- Is able to grant pardons
- Has to give a state of Union address occasionally
- Adjourn Congress if 2 houses are divided about it
- Receive ambassadors and commission officers
- It is the president's duty to make sure the laws of the US are faithfully executed
Article III JUDICIAL BRANCH
- Have to maintain their “good behavior” and judgments (therefore their salary cannot be reduced during their term)
- The Supreme Court handles cases involving the Constitution, federal laws, treaties and diplomatic officials, international cases between the US and another country, between 2 states(no longer applies; restricted in 1795 by the 11th amendment)/ citizens of 2 states.
- Is able to appeal judgments of lower courts
- First ones to hear and decide cases (foreign ambassadors and individual states)
While I was doing this assignment, I did not have any feelings towards the work. I just felt like it was just a part of what we were supposed to do as students. But in terms of the information that I learned, I felt somewhat annoyed. I was annoyed that we did not study the actual Constitution when we were learning about it earlier in middle school. In addition, studying this made me realized the contradiction between the Preamble and the condition we are in today, and that aggravated me as well.
Five Insights/Questions
1) Although the Preamble states that the Constitution was written "in order to form a more perfect union," it appears that it creates a separation between the people and the government. The Constitution actually aids the government more and give them more power, while in the Preamble it made it seem like it would benefit the people.
2) Are we following the Constitution to its full intentions? Why or why not?
3) Why is it that there are so many specifications in Article 1: Judicial Branch? Does it have to do with it being the most responsive to the people?
4) How does the government revise the Constitution? What process do they have to go through in order to change the original clauses? Is this process similar to how a bill becomes a law?
5) How can a country truly be just and "establish justice", if a judge's salary is their source of good behavior and good judgment?
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Assignment #7: Election Reaction
During this 2008 presidential election, I realize that what the candidates are doing are very respectable. I never really cared about politics (and I still don't), but this particular election drew my attention. The fact that there are still people who are willing to try to get America back on its feet shows a lot of courage in those individuals. In the conditions that America is in now, I am surprised there are still people who would attempt this extremely difficult task of improving America. Regardless of their intentions, I still believe that America is in such a deep ditch that nothing can make much of a difference. I'm just wondering whether or not Obama or McCain has acknowledge this as near-impossible yet. (Not really Obama, because it's kind of obvious that he hasn't since he's all about "hope and change").
It also appears that people have cared more about this election than any before. For example, there were t-shirts made and dance competitions were organized all because of this year's election. I feel that people have made the election a much bigger deal than necessary, especially in school. People have been screaming throughout the whole day that the president was decided. There were also people who planned on not going to school if their desired candidate was not elected. I feel that, as students the presidential election should not concern us so much, to the point where such reactions are provoked. It almost seems as though the presidential elections have become part of pop culture.
It also appears that people have cared more about this election than any before. For example, there were t-shirts made and dance competitions were organized all because of this year's election. I feel that people have made the election a much bigger deal than necessary, especially in school. People have been screaming throughout the whole day that the president was decided. There were also people who planned on not going to school if their desired candidate was not elected. I feel that, as students the presidential election should not concern us so much, to the point where such reactions are provoked. It almost seems as though the presidential elections have become part of pop culture.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)