Blog 3: Impeach Obama?

I would like to begin by saying I do not keep up with politics at all. This is all very new to me, I did not follow the candidates in the recent election. I have never research anything on Obama before this assignment. The title of this article really caught my eye. Why Obama Should be Impeached is an article by David Lindorff were he presents his argument on why Obama should be Impeached. His main argument is based on something he refers to as the "white paper." According to David, the white paper is the White House offering the legal justification for the executing of American citizens solely on the authority of the executive branch. He continues with four points in which defends his argument by using Juan Cole's essay to describe how the papers violate the Constitution. He also refers to a book called "The Case for Impeachment" stating that failure to hold Bush and Cheney to account for their outrages would mean a subsequent president could commit the same crimes with impunity and Obama proved this. I believe David intended his audience to be the general public. I felt like he was trying to use fear to have people agree with him. He made good points and got me interested but had very few references. I could not find much on what David mentioned as "white paper," but this article Daniel Ellsberg says Obama should be impeached over NDAA talks about the NDAA which seemed to me like what David described. J. D. Heyes is the author of this article but he mainly uses Daniel Ellsberg's words. Ellsberg says the NDAA provision is merely an extension of unconstitutional government behavior stemming from the 9/11 attacks and the U.S. global war on terror. Ellsberg also believes Obama has made impeachable offenses. 

According to OBAMA IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS BEGIN!, on  March 11, 2013, Congress is beginning impeachment proceedings against Barack Obama based on the grounds of unauthorized use of the military in Libya and Syria.  Congress is also looking into his involvement in the Fast and Furious scandal.

My final article I feel has been the most informative and covers a wide variety of the Impeachment of Obama debate. The growing case for impeachment of Obama covers the operation Fast and Furious brought up by the previous article I mentioned. It also covers the Drone story of Anwar al-Awlaki which my first article briefly talked about. It also covers many other issues that was not addressed. What I liked most about this article was it described the issue, then it tells you what the experts say. As well as an "Impeachment crimes advisory system" which showed how severe the experts felt on the issue. The experts were Bruce Fein, Herbert Titus, and Louis Fisher. There was a short biography of each expert at the beginning of the article.

Blog 2: Gun Control

While looking for a article through many of the suggested sources, one issue seems to come up more than any other. Can you guess which one? Gun control! One of the most controversial issues in american politics for the past several decades and has only intensified due to the recent escalation on mass shootings. I should note that I started my research with an unbiased opinion. 

House Democrats unveil gun-control proposals  is a recent article which discusses the 15-point plan to address gun violence by the House Democrats. The proposal declares that democrats support the second amendment and would never back any attempt to infringe it but that the constitutional right to bear arms "is not unlimited." It also calls for a federal ban on military-style assault weapons. The plan also includes calls for universal background checks and more money for the Justice Department’s national criminal background check system, as well as more federal dollars to fund mental health, school security programs, gun buy-back programs and scientific research on “the relationship between popular culture and gun violence.” 

My conclusion is I support this proposal except the ban on military-style assault weapons. I do not own a assault weapon nor do I see any practical use for them but I believe a ban on assault weapons would do absolutely nothing except upset the people who love their assault weapons. Banning assault weapons is not the answer is a great article that shows statistics that less than one percent of gun murders, and that "assault weapons or high-capacity magazines" were used in at least 12 of the 43 mass shootings since 2009. 

I strongly support universal background checks, more money for the Justice Department's, and more federal dollars to fun mental health, school security programs etc... I believe in the saying, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." Sheriff targets mental health illness to gun violence clearly states, "Eight of the nine killers in mass shootings last year had histories of mental illness. Few are believed to have been under the care of a mental health care provider or part of an organized community support system. None were blocked from legally purchasing a weapon." That sounds like the most logical cause of the mass shootings to me, not which type of weapons they used. 

Personal quest to make guns' toll more visible . I felt it was really important to share this article. It has got to be the most ridiculous, most illogical argument make in favor of more gun control. This article talks about Representative Jim Langevin, Democrat of Rhode Island, whose spinal cord was severed by a bullet when he was 16 years old. The thing is, it happened due to an accidental discharge of a firearm. How he could make a argument with his situation was just beyond me. So I accidentally cut my finger off while chopping vegetables, should we start banning knifes now?