Syria is currently under the rule of the Baathist party, which is identified as a socialist movement and is currently led by Bashar al-Assad. In April 2011, peaceful protests began in Syria to challenge the dictatorship running the country. The government responded violently, torturing and killing civilians who eventually began to fire back.

Syria was originally drawn with artificial lines put in place by European powers, causing a large variety of ethnic and religious groups to be thrown together. This already caused tension in the country, and makes any kind of issue explosive.

Russia is Syria’s #1 ally, and continues to send weapons to the Assad regime, enabling them to continue killing civilians. Russia blocks the United Nations Security Council from allowing any foreign intervention against the current Syrian government without their blessing.

In the past, North Korea has scheduled may possible reunions such as these ones, only to cancel them for various reasons. The last successful reunion was in 2010, but before that they were very infrequent.

Since the Korean War did not end in a ceasefire, but in an armistice, North Korea still sees South as a threat. Therefore, the fact that they are running military exercises with the United State (which, by the way, if you didn't notice, NK doesn't like us) is seen as a threat, and NK officials want their citizens to have nothing to do with allies of Americans.

In a TED talk from 2010, Sir Ken Robinson talks about the past and current education systems. He explains that the concept of free, public education available to all began during the Industrial Revolution, when the goal was to educate more individuals so they can contribute to the industries. However, many factory-like aspects of these original schools, the production line mentality, are still integrated in school systems today--for example the day runs on a bell schedule and students are grouped together solely by age. He explains how this gives students a disadvantage in school, because certain children develop at different times in their lives, making age not quite an accurate representation of a person's growth. He also notes that ADHD diagnostic rates have increased with increases in standardized testing and the fact that teachers are more often standing at the head of a class talking rather than interacting with students. Overall, Robinson takes a stand against conformity and standardized education, as it limits students’ potentials by too simply suggesting that students are either great if they’re smart and do well in class, or written off as not great if they excel less in certain classes. 

Pope Francis said that the church has been too focused on the issue of gay people. Unlike his predecessor’s he wants the church to have different priorities. His predecessors were very concerned about the topic of gay marriage, abortion, and contraceptive methods and thus preached about them a lot. However Pope Francis believes that the church might be at a risk of  losing its true purpose by insisting upon these “small-minded rules”. “He said it was not up to him to judge about the sexual orientation of clergy as long as they were searching for God and had goodwill.”

A current issue occurring with China and Japan is the fight over who owns this group of islands called the Senkakus to the Japanese and Diaoyu to the Chinese. It is said that these islands probably have fossil fuels, which both China and Japan need being some of the countries that import the most fossil fuels. Japan used to depend heavily on nuclear power, but because of the accident that happened to Fukushima in 2011, they had to shut down all its nuclear reactors and rely more on fossil fuels. However, the Chinese still believe they have claims to the island. Both countries do not intend to compromise, since the Chinese refuse to meet with the Japanese government and Japanese

This article talks about the struggling economy throughout all of Europe. Unemployment and poverty levels are setting record highs right now. Over the past years most of the economic struggles in Europe have been linked to Greece, Spain, and Portugal, and these country's economies do not look like they are going to improve any time soon. The larger economies of France and Italy are also headed in the wrong direction, and by 2015 will be in similar conditions as Greece. The unemployment in the Eurozone is sitting at an all time record high at 12.1%. The Youth unemployment rate has jumped to 41%. The president of Italy has even warned the country of "wide spread tension and unrest" in 2014.

High ranking officials and police are also addicted, so government chooses not to limit meth distribution. The money made from meth is used for the country's nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

This liberal source takes a fairly unbiased stance on this issue, as there aren't many sides you can take on the topic. It fits in with America's general view that drugs are bad, and North Korea is partaking in suspicious activities.

The source comments on how the European Crisis is similar to our own, and how the countries needing to get out of debt have not been allowed to adopt specific policies that would help them accomplish this task. It cites the fact that the federal reserve has created more than 2 million in response to our recession. They present the failing economy more as a result of heartless investors demanding unreasonable returns on their money, rather than companies trying to recoup their losses as I assume would be portrayed on a right wing source. At the end, they suggest the as of yet unused bargaining power of the governments as a potential starting point for recovery. Argentina, which defaulted on its debt in 2001, was unable to recover after trying the IMF route.

The Nation initially presents opinions from other, more conservative ideas, citing Marco Rubio, a right-wing senator from Florida and a would-be presidential candidate. However, the Nation ultimately criticizes their opinion, emphasizing their liberal perspective (eg. “humanitarian interventionists—in true, oxymoronic fashion”, “The real danger is that liberal interventionists and old-style conservative ones might make common cause. If so, they’d probably find an ally in Secretary of State John Kerry, who’s wanted to bomb Syria for a long while—despite President Obama’s opposition to the idea.”). They present a negative perspective on the current U.S. intervention in Syria, opposing military force, chemical weapons, and air strikes, and siding with President Obama’s idea on how to deal with Syria.

The article basically redefine the meaning of love and the purpose of marriage. Liberals fully support same-sex marriage and want the opportunity to make same-sex marriage legal in the states. They argue that love has nothing to do with physical appearance and is all ina

With such an emphasis on gun control nowadays in the media and in political debates it comes as a surprise that ATF agents are losing their guns. These ATF agents reportedly have misplaced their firearms and in some cases these do not get recovered leaving them to the public to recover these. With an issue such as this coming out it will undoubtedly strengthen the argument that we need to emphasize stricter gun control laws as are agents of the law cannot even keep track of them. This also begs the question of the responsibility of our federal agents. This is much different than a civilian losing a gun because we entrust these individuals with our lives to uphold the law and if they lose their firearms this can lead to criminals or kids getting their hands on them which may lead to in severe cases homicide. So should we enforce stricter gun control laws because of cases like these ATF officials or do we need to enforce stricter policies on ATF policies.

This perspective is from one of the best known conservative news source, Fox. The right leaning article suggested how it agreed with the tactics used to resolve, at least partially, Portugal's massive debt. They called it an "economic crash diet", and expressed agreement with the policies taken. Pension cuts and tax increases are things normally conservatives would disagree with, but in the case of trying to absolve a country's debt they seem to have made an exception. However, it is clear that they favor absolving work entitlements. In accord with the right wing desire to spend responsibly, they indicate favor at Prime Minister Coehlo's responsibility, citing almost a 10% drop in monetary borrowing. As they near the end of this fiscal crisis (hopefully), the 3- year bailout program will end in may. The right wing supports financial independence, which hopefully Portugal will realize very soon.

The Shrine is said to be a controversial religious landmark, having been where many of the highest war criminals of World War II are enshrined. Emperor Hirohito refused to visit the shrine after 1978 and the inclusion of other war criminals. Thus the visiting of this shrine is portrayed as betray to trust and good relations between Japan, China, and Korea.

This represents a conservative point of view in the sense it dramatizes the negative actions taken by foreign countries, in this case Japan, and hints that the U.S. has good intentions, in this case that U.S. will not support Japan's self-reliant path.

Now that Japan is more self-reliant on their military, they’ve been drafting new guidelines to loosen the restrictions on the exports of weapons. The Chinese are worried about this, especially because of Japan’s history in World War II.

This article is from a Korean media outlet. By looking at past history, especially the invasion of Korea during World War II by the Japanese, there is high likelihood this news source would be bias against Japan. While reading this article we have to take into account that this media outlet may try to exaggerate future outcomes and motives of Japanese actions that seem threatening to them. It is obvious that the Koreans are on China’s side because of things like quoting a Chinese spokeswoman on how people are worried about the loose restrictions on exporting weapons. They also mention the commemoration of the Chinese victory over Japan in WWII and the Nanjing Massacre.

http://www.livescience.com/39155-fracking-is-draining-local-communities.html

These two articles recommend two courses of action that the United States should take to deal with North Korea. The first one, written by Joseph Farah from World News Daily, says that we should extend our friendship to North Korea and “carpet bomb them” with love and supplies. He says we should appeal to the oppressed civilians of North Korea and wants America to stop defending only itself, and extend its aid to others. He emphasizes “let’s try extending our hands in love to the people of North Korea.” However, the other article, written by Jeremi Suri from the New York Times, says we should just bomb North Korea because he believes that the crisis in North Korea has evolved into a “strategic threat to America’s core national interests.” He is more general when referring to the country and not mentioning the people, and believes that the North Korean crisis will destabilize surrounding country’s economies. Farah obviously has a more humanitarian view, and seeks to take action by aiding the North Korean people, while Suri is worried about the international consequences and wants to get the issue off the map. These are two sources from the extreme opinions on dealing with North Korea.

washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/7/bipartisan-unity-n-korea-republicans-praise-obamas/?page=all

On the other hand, the second article, “A Syrian’s Cry for Help,” believes that “what Syria needs is a legitimate government that is strong enough to delegitimize militias,” not a “half-hearted intervention” by the international community. While both articles see that the Syrian conflict is not a civil war but a barbaric campaign, they disagree over the degree to which the international intervention will be effective.

Second Article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/opinion/a-syrians-cry-for-help.html

The central disagreement is about the purpose of the Yasukuni war shrine. The first article is by Chinese ambassador Cui Tiankai, who talks about the shrine as Japan’s tribute to Japanese war criminals and a risk to ties with China. The other article however, which was written by Japanese ambassador Kenichiro Sasae, says that Tiankai’s op-ed is wrong, and that the shrine is meant for praying for those who sacrificed themselves for their country, not to honor the small number of war criminals.

Since these articles are written by ambassadors of China and Japan, they obviously go against each other as to what the issue is. The Chinese ambassador’s op-ed says that the issue is Japan’s increasing militarism as a threat and that they aren’t going to make peace with China. The Japanese ambassador’s op-ed says that the Japanese have increased their militarism but not as much as China has, and that the issue is actually that China “does not allow open debate and flow of information”. In other words, China always goes with what their own government says and does not consider other opinions.

Second article (written by Japanese ambassador): http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/chinas-propaganda-campaign-against-japan/2014/01/16/925ed924-7caa-11e3-93c1-0e888170b723_story.html

The first article discusses the benefits charter schools give. By offering longer days and higher salaries to teachers, charter schools have produced relatively higher test scores and more prepared students. While charter schools have become popular, the second article argues that there is no reason for the funding to go solely to state run charter schools, when failing public schools with low-income children need more help. Another concern is that charter schools simply get to choose which students they want to teach; opting for the wealthier students. This leaves the public schools to educate whatever students did not make the charter school cut. The author of article two argues that if the charter schools are doing something worth replicating, then why not fund that type of teaching towards public schools that are in need.  While one author views charter schools as the solution to solving the nation’s education reform, the other author believes that charter schools are helpful yet so selective in their processes that there is no way to tell what the outcome would actually be. The central disagreement between these two authors is whether charter schools are worth the billions that the government would pay to run them. 

Both these opinion based editorials discuss the topic of gun control and they discuss where they stand on the topic of gun control. The first editorial from CNN the author, LZ Granderson explains how gun control is not preventing anything from happening. "The city has bans on both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. And yet each week people continue to die in the streets from gunshot wounds." Even with gun control laws in effect people are still purchasing and killing others with illegal guns. The authors from both editorials disagree on when gun control should come into effect and how much good will actually come from it. Granderson argues that gun control is not the answer and that if we try to look at this issue from just one perspective than gun control in that sense will be futile. Rich Lowry from Politico argues that gun control is necessary however it is impossible to enforce as we should not focus on gun control but rather on the mental state of those purchasing the weapons.

http://www.advocate.com/commentary/2014/01/31/op-ed-how-nfl-tackling-lgbt-issues

I was not able to find a new op ed  in opposition of the LGBT community, but I found two sources that talks about both perspectives by people within it. The first article talks about bisexuality in the point of view of a homosexual person. He admits that even for a gay person, bisexuality is questioned. In our society today, bisexual women are seen as “confused girls” and bisexuality in men is just a “layover” for being gay. In fact, bisexual men have difficulty coming out because they are labeled as gay once they are seen with another man. Author Tyler questioned but did not confront his bisexual friend. Tyle thought being bisexual was just a phase and people will eventually figure out if they are gay or straight through being bisexual. However, he’s known his bisexual friends for too long that he realize being attracted to both sexes is not going to go away.

The second article talks about the experience of being gay from the point of view of an NFL player, Wale Davis. There are conflicting issues about being gay while Davis is in the NFL team. He had to act very masculine and try his best at all time because he wants to prove that his sexuality will not affect his performance, especially to the homophobic community. On the other hand, Davis avoided talking about how homophobic the NFL is.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/12/27/three-big-things-that-could-derail-us-economic-recovery-in-2014/

These two articles talk about how 2014 will be the year that the economy has a breakout, but there are a few factors that play against it. The major people involved with the recovery of the economy are, of course, the nation's people as well as the President and business owners. Breaking down each article, the similar situation at hand is money (who would have thought?). The first article explains the differences in how the economy is worse or better than they were before the recession. There have 30,000 jobs created each month since 2001, but it needs to be 4 times larger to keep up with the population growth in America. Although the President has optimistic ideas for the economic growth, the actual progress of the economic recovery won't match his hopes for America. In the second article, it explains the 3 main causes that could steer the economic recovery off course: ObamaCare, China's baking mess, and the Federal Reserve. Although ObamaCare was the idea Affordable Care Act, people say it's too expensive for their needs and that they are raising the charge rates in 2015.

Both sides of the Syrian conflict are committing human rights violations. In particular, the UN recently reported 240,000 Syrians are now having their basic rights violated because they’re trapped in the cross-fire caused by the war. Both the pro-government and rebel forces have prevented the flow of goods and services to areas within Syria. They’ve bombarded the entire area without regard for the civilians that live nearby.

International humanitarian law requires the government to grant “safe passage for protected persons out of the besieged area,” to ensure the health of the wounded, and to “not destroy objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population through indiscriminate bombardments and attacks.”

The  UN report states that Syria has violated all of these planks of the law. Civilians in the besieged areas face frighteningly low levels of basic life necessities such as food, water, and electricity. Some religious leaders have succumbed to allowing residents to eat cats and dogs for survival. Other rural areas have reported that a significant number of deaths were due to inadequate healthcare and nutrition.

Obama is continuing to strengthening the borders by enforcing the security and the infrastructure.  He is planning to combat organizations that traffic drugs, weapons, money and smuggled people by creating new criminal penalties. Also by planning to work together with the communities and the across the border countries saying  "community trust and cooperation are key to effective law enforcement. ". Obama is also enhancing investigative resources by increasing federal agents to southwest border. Obama is trying to make the borders safer by fighting transnational criminal organizations and working with Mexico and Canada.

Global Securities is a website that tries to be as objective as possible, saying their mission is to “try to bring you the facts, to help you form your opinion. We try to stick to the facts, and let others debate opinion.” From their website we looked at the issue of the Senkaku / Diaoyutai Islands between China and Japan. Here are just the facts:

China claims sovereignty over the islands but it is also claimed by Taiwan and Japan. The United States is backing Japan’s claim up, saying they oppose any actions performed by a single third party that would undermine that claim. Under the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, the United States would respond to any armed attack within any territory under the administration of Japan but urges peaceful solutions to be found.

Some say that if China abandons its claims, the American-Japanese control of Asia-Pacific would be reaffirmed, but if China wins its claims it would mean the era of American dominance over Asia-Pacific would end. Furthermore, some say that China’s intimidation will lead to a loss of respect from the international community.

One of the most famous prisons in the United States is Rikers prison in New York. Rikers has recently been under investigation as lawsuits are being filed against prison guards and reports of an increase in violence between inmates causes unrest in the prison. Reports have said that in 1 year alone 8 stabbings have occurred in the prison and violence is on the rise. Some of the most disturbing facts about Rikers comes from the prison guards who are also cited as turning a blind eye to mental instability in the prison. One inmate was said to have been "baked" inside of his prison cell causing him to die shortly after. Rikers is suffering from many problems including lawsuits against them for brutality from prison guards. As one of the most well known prisons in the U.S. Rikers is always under national spotlight.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/russellflannery/2014/01/09/u-s-economic-recovery-is-elixir-for-hong-kongs-billionaire-exporters/

Between these two sources, the theories on the US Economic Recovery varies. In the first article, they talk about how the economy will raise by 3% which would be the most robust expansion for any year since 2005. In addition to that, economists have suggested before that the recovery appeared on the verge of acceleration, only to have their expectations derailed by sub-par growth that left unemployment at painfully high levels. In the second article, it states that the Hong Kong manufacturers suffered badly when the American economy tanked after the global financial crisis in 2008. Its stock lost nearly 90% of its value between the end of 2005 and 2009 as orders shrank. And that the resilience of China’s export sector last year at a time when much of the global economy has been slack. Exports in November rose by 13% from a year earlier, fueling the country’s biggest monthly trade surplus since 2009. Two-way trade in China is expected to have expanded 8% in 2013, outpacing a roughly 5% global increase.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/20/opinion/steyer-keystone-pipeline/index.html?iref=allsearch

These two articles both look at the Keystone Pipeline from two perspectives. Fox News is known for being a more conservative news source and this is reflected in the article written by Grover Norquist. The article was written in 2012 (so it's a little out dated) and it argues that congress should approve the Keystone Pipeline without the president's consent. Norquist argues that approving the pipeline will boost the economy, provide America with a lot more oil, and open up a lot of new jobs. Norquist then goes to criticize President Obama for continuously delaying making a decision on the project. He states that by refusing to approve the pipeline, Obama is actually just hurting this country. The other article is from a news source known to be more neutral-liberal: CNN. In the article, written by Tom Steyer, Steyer claims that the Keystone Pipeline should never be approved because of its environmental impact. Steyer explains that President Obama has stated he will only approve the project if it can be proved that the environmental impact won't be too severe. Steyer also explains that Obama has gone to other nations stating that we need to stop global warming and argues that if the President is to stay true to his words, then the Keystone Pipeline can't be approved. Steyer acknowledges that building the pipeline will benefit the oil industry, but claims that the resulting pollution is not worth it. Both these sources look at the same issue from very different perspectives and it's important to know what evidence each side is using to argue for/against an issue. Using two articles is beneficial because it can show you what people are saying about your issue and how you can combat those who oppose you. Knowing both sides of an argument increase your chances at making a valid point and potentially swaying your opponents.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/27/anxiety-rising-over-relations-between-japan-and-china/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

These two articles focus on the economy at risk because of the tensions between China and Japan. Both of them say that the relationship between the countries is one of the most important when it comes to trade, but because of the countries not wanting to have anything to do with one another, their trading has decreased.

The two sources together help us understand that the economies of China and Japan are at risk more than with just one because of one being more detailed than the other in certain topics. For example, the NBC article says that China and Japan are important trading partners. The New York Times article also says this, but includes examples of big businesses that are in both countries, such as General Motors, Microsoft, Nike, and Coca Cola. With more detail from another viewpoint, we get a better understanding of how important the trading between China and Japan is.

Another benefit of having two sources is that we get more quotes from different people, meaning more evidence supporting the information. NBC has a couple by an economist who talks about the economy being at risk, and The New York Times has one by Prime Minister Abe saying that Japan made an oath not to go to war.

http://www.humanevents.com/2014/02/28/intervene-or-end-syrian-war/

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/28/opinion/ghitis-syria-intervention/

These two articles present opposing viewpoints of whether the United States should intervene in the Syrian civil war. They address the controversy over the United States being the "international police," providing the consequences of intervention, or the lack thereof.

The first article lists several reasons why we should not intervene in the war. It claims thatPresident Obama has no right to intervene since the public almost unanimously opposed it in 2013. It also claims that the United States' "moral" obligation to Syria is based on loose grounds - why does the United States suddenly care about Syria when the Assad regime has been in power for 40 years? Why re we working with Russia to get rid of chemical weapons when they are Syria's number one ally? These questions showed the excuses the United States is making in an attempt to suppress someone else's civil war.

The second article talks about why the Unites States should intervene. If the United States is able to successfully end the war in Syria and help establish a democratic government, it will deter other dictators from harming the international community. By forcing Syria to remove their chemical weapons, the United States will send a message to the rest of the world that it has the power to fight against dictatorship.

Involving in a war is a difficult and complex decision to make. These two articles showed the complexity of the situation, as the Unites States have to take into account of the Syrian civilians, national and international security, and other impending dictators.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2014/0327/Poll-finds-broad-rapid-shift-among-Americans-toward-gay-marriage

The first link introduced us to a bill which currently passes in Tennessee that allows people to harass those who are gay due to it being believed as a part of a "religious belief". This allowance of discrimination and bullying on school grounds due to disagreements in certain beliefs is believed to be scaring other people and was predicted to create an unsafe environment for those who are of same-sex marriage or LGBT. Meanwhile the second link showed supports of the gay rights movement in America. A poll conducted for a gay rights organization received a 75% approval rate due to the supports of the young adults in this matter. The only age group that are opposed to this matter are those who are in an older generation around the age range of 55-65. I think it says a lot that the growth in our generation, encourages the more support for gay rights and introduce the United States as a more of an open country for social rights movements. These two articles each serves as both pro and con in the gay rights movement and provides us different point of views to the people who opposed it and those who supports it.

These two articles both look at why guns are easily purchased and why they aren’t regulated in a stricter manner. The first article questions why a gun lobby, such as NRA, has bullied Congress into making it impossible for the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Agency to create a national database of gun owners in order to track who owns what. The gun lobby has also tried its very hardest to eliminate waiting periods for firearms purchases. From this, the author concludes that regulation of sale and purchase can and would bring down the number of illegal firearms on the street. The second article reflects on previous incidents and suggests that not all deaths involving guns are the same, therefore trying to address each incident from the same viewpoint is useless. It also argues that gun control laws would mean nothing because those who buy and use guns in a negative way, don’t really care much about breaking the law. This supports the idea that the problem must be solved at the source; purchases. However, regulating purchases is nearly impossible, thus the debate over gun control has no end.

http://chimes.biola.edu/story/2013/feb/06/opposing-viewpoints-strict-gun-control-reform-must/

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/opinion/granderson-gun-control-fail/

In a Pew Research Institute article from 2003, 77% of Americans saw the North Korean government as a great or moderate danger to Asia, which rose by twelve percentage points from 2002. However, in a more recent study from 2013 also done by Pew, 56% of Americans believed that the US government should take North Korea's nuclear missile threats "very seriously." Although the two questions were slightly different and therefore would elicit slightly different responses, it can be concluded that concern about North Korea has declined, although the majority of the US population still sees it as important.

In the 2013 study, Americans were divided over whether North Korea was willing and capable of carrying through their nuclear missile threats. There is a slight majority (47%) that believe North Korea is willing and capable, as opposed to the 41% who think they are not.

Another interesting difference between the studies done in both years is that 2003 focuses more on the international realm while 2013 focuses on America's concerns. This may show a decrease in America's concerns with how the international community views its response to North Korea, or may show how the international community is more concerned with the re-emergence of North Korea as a potential nuclear threat than they are with how the US responds. The 2003 article was very concerned with growing anti-American sentiments in other countries, possibly reflecting a concern that other countries were going to side with North Korea against America. This no longer seems to be a concern.

Basically, although North Korea does seem to have the intent to become a nuclear threat, they do not yet have the capabilities (weaponry, armed forces, funding, etc) to fulfill that. So while we may be worried, we must remember: perception and reality are not the same thing, and while something may seem dangerous, practically, they may not be.

http://www.people-press.org/2003/08/22/international-public-concern-about-north-korea/

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/07/06/two-years-of-economic-recovery-women-lose-jobs-men-find-them/ -Phi

According to the PewResearch on the Deficit Reduction Declines as Policy Priority Article, the rating for the top priority to the President and Congress for strengthening the nation's economy went from 86% in January of 2013 to 80% in January of 2014, which obviously means they aren't making it as important as it used to be, but it is still the top priority of the country. Along with that, in terms of the deficit reduction, 80% of Repulbicans and 66% of Independents agree that reducing the budge deficit should be the top priority for the President and Congress, when only 49% of Democrats agree, being the lowest percentage ever since Obama has taken office.

Studies form 2011 state that ever since the Great Recession, recovery has been far more better for men than it is for women. According the Pew Research Center analysis, men have gained 768,000 jobs and lowered their unemployment rate by 1.1 percentage points to 9.5% whereas women lost 218,00 jobs and their unemployment rate increased by 0.2 percentage points to 8.5%. Even though this is happening in the same time period, men are still have a job advantage over women. They say that America is the land of opportunity, but is that really true if there is no equality towards both gender roles? The reports state that men have been affected by the Great Recession more than women because they lost way more jobs. But even before the recession began, woman were still losing more jobs than men in employment. During the start of the recession, men held 3.4 million more jobs than women in December 2007. Due to these trends of economic recovery for men and women, I feel like there’s still a long way until woman get the same opportunities as men do in the workforce. Perhaps the government can help by setting up stronger laws against discrimination in the work place.

In another article that we found which talked about the when more people are being deported more and more people are likely to cause crimes and looking at data from how people are getting deported. From the years of 2008-2011 more people were deported from the untied states but recently people have been deported from the broader

We also found another statistic of how during Obama's term he deported more people than in previous years. Throughout his term he deported 1.95 million people all together. Previous years it was calculated that about 350,000 people were deported yearly. We believe that this should be stopped because there separating innocent families. They should deport people that are doing crimes not innocent families.

Well we believe that the Obama administration should stop deporting innocent people and focus more on those immigrant people that are out committing crimes. The people that are not helping our society as a whole.

Congress should limit the deportation and make laws that protect the innocent with small crimes. They should deport people with big crimes affect the community like drunk drivers, any thief, and robbers. Those are the people that should get deported the ones that bring down the economy.

A poll done by the Pew Research center in 1997 showed the awareness that the American person had on global warming and climate change. The data shows that only a mere 24% of people worry "a great deal" on the "green house effect or 'global warming'". It is understandable that at that point in time, Americans are blissfully unaware of the effects that factory air pollution and automobile emissions are causing.

Let's fast forward to the year 2006. In the Pew polls, we see that the percentage of Americans who believe that the green house effects and global warming are happening rose to a dramatic 65%. That's a very high spike in such a short time. Let's analyze why that sudden spike came to be, shall we? On May 14, 2006, an Academy Award winning documentary was released that shook everyone's beliefs on climate change. "The Inconvenient Truth" was a movie based off United States' ex-Vice President Al Gore's slideshow that was meant to educate Americans on the serious problems on global warming. The film raised public awareness of climate change and sparked the "green" movement that still occurs today. On a side note, republicans didn't receive the movie quite well (George Doubleyuh didn't believe it was a real thing).

However, moving on forward to the year 2014, we see a sharp drop on climate change concern based on Pew Research. On a poll that ranked Americans' national worries, 51% of Americans responded that they worry "Little if not at all" about climate change. 24% of Americans claimed that they worried a "great deal" over climate change. That's the same as it was 17 years before! The government should take steps again to raise awareness of the real problem that climate change is. Just because it isn't the main headline does not mean it's not important. Although some steps have been taken for the wellness of the earth, there are still a lot of ways it's still being polluted.

Another Pew Research poll asked how many people agree with the following statement: "There needs to be stricter laws and regulations to protect the environment". Graph Trends show that Democrats, females, 18-49 year old, blacks, high school graduates, low income, and atheists agree with that statement the most. On the other hand, Republicans, males, 65+ year old, white, some college educated, high income, and white evangelical protestant people disagree the most with that statement. We can see that those who disagree are the richer majority of the country. We can infer that they disagree maybe because they're the ones making boatloads of money while destroying our earth. Wealth shouldn't influence our stance in climate change. Alas, if they keep going with their ways, they will soon realize that no matter how much money they have, once every tree has been cut down, every fish has been fished, every river has been polluted, every bit of oxygen poisoned, money can't save them then. I am Ron Burgundy. Stay Classy, San Diego.

(Table 1: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2013/06/SDT-2013-06-LGBT-0-14.png )

(Article 1: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/06/13/a-survey-of-lgbt-americans/ )

Multiple researches has shown that support for the LGBT community has risened, yet there remains nearly equal support and opposition of the topic, where many groups of people have high majority of supporters and others have similar percentages for opposers. As of right now, only 17 states made same sex marriages legal- that is: 68% of states have the majority of people opposing the LGBT community. While there are neutral persons on this topic, the survey from the perspective of people within the LGBT community named, “Images of Parties, Institutions,” suggests that coservative groups such as the Republican Party and Profesional sports Leagues are morely unfriendly torwards them.It is possible that friendly and neutral does not mean supporting. Overall, the amount of unfriendliness is only about a third of answerers, homosexuality is still doubted and opposed in one group or the other.

(Table 2: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2013/06/SDT-2013-06-LGBT-0-14.png )

(Article 2:http://www.people-press.org/2013/06/06/in-gay-marriage-debate-both-supporters-and-opponents-see-legal-recognition-as-inevitable/ )

It is obvious that there are still oppositions and discriminations against LGBT members, but religion always is the first group people think of. While most religious groups are seen as unfriendly to LGBT members, not 90% of religious persons are; in addition, many of which have shown changes.

(Table 3: http://www.people-press.org/files/2013/06/6-6-13-4.png )

Within people who support and oppose, there is always a noticeable percentage of people admitting that same-sex marriage is inevitable; this means that these persons do have the understand of the concept in homosexuality, or are neutral- and so, not strongly opinionated against gay rights. Possibly, these persons are just uncomfortable with the idea of homosexuality and same sex marriage because they are not open to the “new” concept. Because there are still doubts about the same-sex parents’ ability to raise children, I think it is time the public broadcast more about how this should not be a concern. There are famous same-sex couples who are married and adopt children. However, a large part of the public either frown upon them, or do not see them as the representations for the LGBT community- they are seen as exceptions. On Youtube, there are videos that shows the meaning of an LGBT family (here is one I like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JG0yqhzVuYA ) and I think videos and documentaries like these should be shown on TV simply because some people will avoid clicking the video to watch and others won’t. These people can also skip the channel easily, but for some, it could be interesting, and could be a topic to talk about at work.

Being a neutral person about gay rights is only making the opposing side seem more powerful. So, I encourage all persons, even if you are not interested, to be more open to learn more about what is it like to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and other different gender identities; because you will realize that “there is no difference” in love.

The attitude of Japan towards China has deteriorated over the past 6 years according to a Pew Research article on global attitudes toward China. The favorability in 2007 of Japan towards China was 29% and in 2013 it dropped to 5%, making it a 24% change between the 6 years. Other countries such as some of the U.S., parts of Europe, and parts of the Middle East are also anti-China, however Japan has the least favorability out of all these countries. Reasons for this include China being a commercial competitor and the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands dispute. But mostly, we believe that the significant unfavorability represents their past history leading back to World War II. In fact, according to a Pew Research article on tensions in Asia, 78% of China agree that Japan hasn’t sufficiently apologized for its military actions during the 1930s and 1940s.

Unfortunately, these tensions are affecting the economies of the two countries. China’s military growth has been viewed negatively by 96% of Japanese surveyed and 91% of South Koreans surveyed. Globally, China is viewed as the world’s 2nd leading economic power behind the United States.

China’s GDP has been steadily increasing by about 1 trillion per year. Japan’s GDP has increased by about a trillion between 2009 and 2011. China’s increased issues between Japan and its quickly growing economy shows just how ambitious China is for money and power. Soon they will rival the United States in economy, and its increase in military presence is seen negatively by its other Asian neighbors.

According to a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center, 56% of Americans believe that gun violence is higher than it was 20 years ago while only 12% believe that it is lower while 26% believe that it has not changed.

The gun homicide rate in the United States began rising in the 1960s, continued through the 70s and hit peaks in 1980 and early 90s. After 1993, which according the Pew Research Center was the peak of gun homicides, there was a plunge in homicides. There has been less deaths post 1993 but the public still believes that there has been more. There was 31,672 deaths from guns in the United States, 19,392 were suicides. While there has been a decrease in the number of gun homicides the gun suicide rate is higher than it was in 1981.

The decline in gun homicides can not be explained so easily. However a review by the National Academy of Sciences believes that a decline in the 80s was due to young boomers growing old, but a flare up in conjunction with a rising market for crack cocaine, the crack epidemic. There was recruitment of younger men by drug sellers who were willing to use guns and pop a cap in someone. By the 90s there was crack markets withered and thus young people found jobs instead of

One important factor that makes adopting Common Core difficult is price. Although Common Core will be funded through state governments, we must consider all the costs that will be necessary to implement Common Core. These include costs related to creating and scoring new tests, obtaining the proper technical equipment and support, and buying new books, computers, and resources to learn Common Core objectives. All these costs add up quickly, and the Thomas B. Fordham Institute estimates that the national cost for adopting this program will range from $1 billion to $8 billion, with just the development of tests being $2 million more than our nation’s existing assessment budget. Yes, the government should be responsible for the funding, but this ultimately means higher taxes on American citizens when everyone is constantly fighting for lower taxes.

In an article written by Patrick O’donnell for Cleveland.com, the new Common Core standards will force students to answer multiple questions which are all dependent on each other. In other words, if a student were to get the answer for number 1 incorrect, then questions number 2, 3, and 4 would also be incorrect. A statistic from the article also notes that “Nationwide, only 32 percent of fourth-graders answered the questions right and only 23 percent in the urban districts. In Cleveland, only 15 percent of students answered the questions correctly.” Although this shows that all students, regardless of their economic status, are performing poorly, . The new Common Core test also includes an essay, which only makes the test more difficult. Only 33 percent of fourth-graders were able to answer the questions in the essay correctly. Through research, we also learned that only 39 to 48 percent of students following the Common Core in Ohio were proficient.

So what should the government do? The Common Core is certainly a good idea -- with the emphasis on critical thinking skills rather than rote memorization, students will be more prepared for the academics of college as well as the challenges of adulthood. Our public schools should continue to advocate this emphasis, although perhaps it is not necessary to make all schools take the Common Core tests, as this is where most of the costs stem from. If the government simply approves or helps revise the Common Core standards and general curriculum, the schools can work out for themselves how to incorporate the standards while also keeping in mind other ways to help students, especially those who struggle with class. By simply adopting the standards, and having students learn to use critical thinking and problem solving skills, we can avoid the expensive costs of developing new sets of tests and purchasing the technology for testing, among other things. Additionally, if Common Core is not working for every single student, teachers can still have the authority to adjust their teaching styles to best help their students, rather than blindly follow the federally-endorsed curriculum. Therefore, the federal government should play a significant role in helping develop the standards so our nation has a set of goals for students and teachers to reach in education, but the government should not require that all schools must take the Common Core tests.

http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cleveland.com%2Fmetro%2Findex.ssf%2F2014%2F04%2Fnew_common_core_tests_may_over.html&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNH-KXstJjwMKex0QOOtriNNNyd2Ig

The European Economic Crisis has driven the nations of the Eurozone apart in more than just financial ways, but the system seems to be working better overall than it was in the previous communist regime. The people of some of the suffering countries are voicing their concerns with the new economic policies that have been implemented. Hungary, according to a survey done in eastern Europe, has 72 percent of their population saying that the current economic regime is worse now than it was under communism, a statement that calls into question the plan in place.

Both Bulgaria and Ukraine have rates above 60 percent as well, with a little less than half of Lithuanians, Slovaks, and Russians sharing that opinion. However, the Polish people are 70 percent in favor of a free market economy. This may have had something to do with the steep increase in economic growth that the Poles have experienced, sending the favorable opinion rocketing 26 percent since 2002. Throughout the countries of the former Eastern Bloc, there is a distinct trend between the age of the person being surveyed and whether or not they favor a free market economy. For example, in Bulgaria, 64 percent of those aged 18-34 are prefer this system, as opposed to only 19 percent of those 55 and older.  

A lot of the eurozones economic problems stem from the huge debt many of the countries are experiencing.  Even huge loans may not be able to be all that effective.  One thing the eurozone could do is share the debts of all the countries.  This would help the weaker countries like Greece.  All 17 countries that use euros could share a collective Eurobond to help pay off debt and interests rates on the bond would remain low because they'd be backed by the collective power of the eurozone.  There is also a banking crisis to be fixed as well.  A European wide banking union, centralized by a regulator may help to alleviate this problem.

For example, in North Dakota, the oil share of total U.S. energy demand is expected to decrease only to 32 percent from 37 percent by 2035. Also, natural gas will increase its share to 26 percent from 25 percent and renewables will grow to 11 percent from 7 percent, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. 

The boom that will follow this will have many economic benefits. By reducing U.S. dependence on crude imports and reduced oil imports would not provide immunity from supply disruptions

The source believes we should not have any involvement in Syria at all because even mere logistical support for the rebels flows back as help for Al Qaeda; the reasons why are unclear. He suggests that the United States should not act as the world’s law enforcement officer, which indicates a more libertarian perspective that advocates for a smaller military. Consequently, the author uses euphemisms such as “neo-colonialism” to describe the United States’ intervention in Syria.

This article written by Frederick M. Hess for the National Review, discusses the things we need to consider when straying away from the Common Core. It details the possibility of leaving students and teachers struggling to adapt to the abrupt shift. Hess also says that “The dynamics [of common core] parallel those of the Obamacare debate, where critics have recognized that it’s important to offer solutions, not just complaints”. The author discusses that it’s more important for us to think of ways to change Common Core for the better, rather than simply argue to do away with it. His views are conservative when it comes to state’s rights. Hess believes that the power to enact Common Core should be totally up to the state; this means that the government should have no say when it comes to how the Common Core should be implemented. 

Beyond giving this advice, the article attacks recent defense cuts which included "gutting missile defense" and de-commissioning places in charge of missile interceptor equipment, because that "only send[s] the wrong message and invite[s] trouble from dictators like Kim Jong Un". Predictably, the article praises recent attempts to re-open some of the shut down interception equipment, and also suggests that the government "continue to deploy both ship and land based missile interceptors and reverse earlier decisions made on missile defense". The author also suggests that, through radio broadcasts, Japan and other neighboring countries should start putting out anti-Kim Jong Un propaganda in hopes of getting to the North Korean people, but also that we should turn to China and essentially ask them to face up to what they've "created." The author sees China as having defended North Korea through all of this, therefore NK's trouble-making is partly China's fault. He calls for China to come to action and help reign in North Korea.

This article cuts to the core of what is up with China’s relationship with Japan. China’s anti-Japanese sentiment stems directly from a its nationalist ideology, using the communist party’s education and propaganda to predispose its citizens. China’s propaganda mainly focuses on particular historical events such as the Sino-Japanese war and the Rape of Nanking to use as excuses for these beliefs. Chinese negative sentiment is not solely aimed at Japan, but also at the United States, pointing toward American imperialism in Asia.

The article goes further and discusses how China has been used in politics by Republicans to depict wrongs in a Democratic leader. Bill Clinton accused George Bush of “coddling the ‘butchers of Beijing’ following the Tiananmen Square massacre.” The article explains that Mitt Romney, Republican candidate from presidency against Obama, had declared China a “current manipulator” and states that Romney’s foreign policies in this field could have lead to tariffs against Chinese imports and a trade war. “Anti-chinese sentiment these days comes mostly from the right” and economic conservatives associate China’s socialism with policies that are unfriendly to capitalism, such as redistribution of income and government regulations.

It sounds like he's using Republicans as a scapegoat for this spending as he does not refer to the House as a whole but instead directly references the "House Republicans." This article reflects left leanings as it conveys anti-violence sentiment. He doesn't want to spend so much on the defense unlike the right-wingers who prefer to take action even in the face of unlikely threat.

Timothy Geithner: U.S. Economy 'Doing Significantly Better Than Anybody Had Reason To Expect'

Timothy Geithner recently said that the financial reforms and other actions in response to the global crisis are helping the U.S. economy to grow at a pace better than there was reason to expect. He also says that the U.S. has been relatively successful in managing to clean up the mess left by the 2008 financial crisis. The growth has averaged just over 2 percent a year since 2009, lower than the 3 percent to 4 percent that many had predicted. From Geithner's perspective, "U.S. economy is doing significantly better than anybody had reason to expect, not just because of the magnitude of the crisis, but because of the size of the force of the shocks that hit the U.S. economy". If Washington fails to deal effectively with the so-called "fiscal cliff", then the progress made in getting the economy back on track could be undone as warned by economists.

 If this issue is not resolved by 2013, tax increases and deep spending cuts adding to up to 4 percent of GDP, overwhelming the U.S. economy. The IMF urges the U.S to raise the ceiling on the level of debt the government can issue, which is protected by law, when similar halt went unresolved until the U.S. almost defaulted on its debt, in the August of 2011.

Geithner said that, "It might feel like an easy path at the moment but it will still leave a set of big questions hanging over the country. I don't think that will help."

This article argues that Wyoming should now change their marriage laws to allow same sex couples to marry. They argue this by stating that it would be the morally correct way. They say that a law passing in 1977 “The paradox means while Wyoming won't allow gay marriage within its borders, it has allowed a same-sex couple to divorce. That's ludicrous.” Star Tribune editorial board of wyoming believes that, “Changing state law is the right thing to do and fits Wyoming's values.”

(The article's page has an advertisement, click "close" to be able to view the article)

In this video, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh is asked about his opinion on Syria’s possession of chemical weapons and Turkey’s involvement in supplying sarin gas to Syrian rebels. President Obama made the case for launching a strike on Syria without revealing Turkey’s involvement, causing controversy over how the international community should react.

Hersh believes that the sarin raises “a grave question about one of the basic elements of the president’s argument for planning to go to war.” He calls Obama’s actions “a long-running operation” in which the U.S. government basically guided the opposition to win the war. Seymour states: “I quote people as saying, once the president makes a decision, it’s almost impossible to change—to get it changed. The president decided that the Syrians did it, and we’re justified in thinking that and continuing to think that, no other option exists.“

the right justification to enter the war against chemical weapons in Syria.

This article is different than other articles because in previous article especially latino articles they draw obama like a hero, unlike this article it shows the broken promises the torture and the stalling for a reform. They make obama seem as if he was the problem to not passing a reform. We have researched an international news source from mexico an they also said thanks to obama the differed action was passed. Thats why many hispanics see him as a great president. An the article was written by a latino.

"One major reason [why global warming is not real] is that we had a very cold snowy winter that's like saying the sun is not real because it was dark last night."

He points out how people believe in argumentum adnumerum that states that something is true just because a lot of people believe in it. Except, he points out that there is no debate here, it is scientists who have proof of global warming and it doesn't matter what people call it, wether they believe it exists or not, it's still a real problem.

His foul language and relaxed atmosphere with quirky and witty comments give his op ed an interesting edge that keeps his audience aware and information flowing. His ability to connect analogies with facts allows information to be easily processed by anyone."What's real is what's real and like it or not, no one can change the nature of reality, except of course with mushrooms.." Bill Maher.

In this clip from the Colbert Show, Stephen Colbert examines different aspects of the Common Core, and though he is more left wing, he appears to be against the Common Core test. In the beginning, he does poke fun at Republicans who argue that the test is too stressful for students, as this is true of most tests anyways. However, throughout the rest of the video, as he explains his “support” of Common Core, he jokes about the kinds of questions and answers the standard values. For instance, one question involves writing a letter detailing what was correct and what was incorrect about a mathematical procedure, and Colbert jokingly relates this to the important skill of “passive-aggressive note writing” in the workplace. 

Thus, overall this video parodies both the criticisms and support of Common Core, and this perspective seems unique considering that the Colbert Show is a left-leaning, faux-right wing show. Left wing parties generally favor more government aid in reforming and improving education systems, and thus a large portion of Common Core support is from liberals. However, though the left wing may still encourage a nationalized set of education standards, perhaps members do not completely agree with the Common Core reforms, as the Colbert Show evidently does not approve of the confusing questions.

(link to video if does not play on Padlet:

http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/nemi1a/common-core-confusion)

This article mostly talks about the island dispute between China and Japan. One fact that we have not heard about the dispute yet is that when the two countries were starting to normalize their relations after World War II, Japanese Prime Minister Tanaka asked Chinese Premier Zhao about the islands, and Zhao said that they shouldn’t worry about it now and leave it for later generations. Unfortunately, what they call the “Zhao-Tanaka” status quo was destroyed when Japan bought the islands in 2012. The article says that the best way to solve this dispute is to revive that Zhao-Tanaka wisdom by calling the island an ecological preserve where no one would be able to use it.

We can tell that this is a left wing op-ed because of how they think the best way to solve the dispute is through justice since no one would end up getting the islands. It is obvious that the authors of this op-ed are against war because they mention that Chinese and Japanese leaders do not want a war because they know that it would disrupt the stability of the economy. What’s interesting is that a lot of the articles we’ve read seem to suggest that China and Japan just hate each other, there’s a war that’s going to happen really soon, and the leaders don’t really care about it, especially Prime Minister Abe. But in this op-ed, mentioning that they actually don’t want war is like saying they care about the issue, but they just don’t know what to do about it, which is what a left wing source would say.

Us: So basically, the US Economic Recovery is trying different ways to recover by rising and lowering all the different sections of the economy such as the GDP, the GDI, the unemployment rate, the rate at which employers are paying their workers. The article talks about what happened before, during and after Clinton and Reagan's time as president, which in our opinions haven't changed much from then. So GDP is supposed to measure the value of goods and services produced in the US, while GDI is a measure of the income generated in the US. They are supposed to be about equal, with some adjustments for capital consumption and foreign net income flows. And from their research, the GDI is rising faster than the GDP output when the revisions are aiming to raise the GDP higher than the GDI.

Putin argued that it was necessary to monitor large numbers of people to expose terrorist contacts, but said "on a political level, it's necessary to limit the appetite of special services with certain rules." Putin's responses may or may not be true but it has definitely sparked interest from people in the U.S who are against the NSA.

UK Foreign Secretary, William Hague, said that Presidential elections in Syria will be a "parody of democracy". Because of Syria’s three-year conflict that has killed around 150,000 people, Hague called “President Assad to stand down”. However, President Assad is working toward another (his third) seven-year term. The international community is disgusted by this action.

The Friends of Syria group - Egypt, France, Germany, Italy, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, the UK and the US met in London to discuss the matter. Hague stated after the meeting: "We are of course united in our disgust and anger at what's happening in Syria and the ruthless utter disregard for human life." The worst part in the election is that it is being held “at a time when millions of people were displaced and the bloodshed was continuing”.

December 20, 2013, Supreme court federal judge ruled Utah's ban on same sex marriages unconstitutional. Salt Lake county clerk soon issued marriage certificates. Questionably, the US supreme court will halt this in June 6, 2014 but the state will try to appeal it.

South Korean President Park Geun-hye stated in a press conference with President Obama that she was concerned about the consequences of North Korea launching a fourth nuclear test. She and South Korean foreign minister Yun Byung-se claim that such a test would launch a nuclear arms race, and would hinder efforts to resume negotiations with North Korea. It is likely that North Korea is prepared for a fourth nuclear test at any time. The Chinese are also concerned about this development, as they have served as ambassadors between North Korea and the United States.

Meanwhile, North Korea continues to cast nuclear expansion firmly within the national goals. So, the chances of North Korea consenting to the international community’s pleas to denuclearize is highly unlikely. 

This week we’re focusing on the island issue again, but this time we’ve found an article from BBC News that tells the detailed facts on why these islands matter, how the issue started, and what China and Japan each claim is the reason that the islands should belong to their own country.

The Senkaku/Diaoyo Islands are not only wanted because of the oil and gas reserves, but because of the fishing grounds that lie near it, they are close to important shipping lanes, and they are in a position surrounded by rising competition between the US and China for military primacy.

Japan owned these islands, as said in the Treaty of San Francisco in 1951, then became under the US, and then brought back to Japan in 1971. Japan says that China never objected to the San Francisco deal and that China only started wanting the islands after their oil resources were becoming an issue. On the other hand, China claims that the islands have belonged to them ever since ancient times.

In conclusion, the issue of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands is a problem because it can increase Japan and China’s military action, hurt their economy as we’ve explained in past weeks, and puts pressure on the politicians. With more detailed facts on this issue, we can better understand that it is actually a very big problem for the two countries.