Three Mondays in June

A Guide to the Supreme Court Decision on the Voting Rights Act : Videos

The Supreme Court on the 1965 Voting Rights Act ... The Supreme Court on the 1965 Voting Rights Act ... ... the Supreme Court's pending ruling on the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Also, ... Guide ... Duration: 498 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:03:51 -0700	Due Process: Voting Rights Act Decision (Aired 7 ... Due Process: Voting Rights Act Decision (Aired 7 ... On this edition of Due Process, the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights ... Duration: 1612 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:12:28 -0700	Due Process: Voting Rights Act Decision (Aired 7 ... Due Process: Voting Rights Act Decision (Aired 7 ... On this edition of Due Process, the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights ... Duration: 1612 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:12:28 -0700	Supreme Court Rulings Loom On Affirmative Action ... Supreme Court Rulings Loom On Affirmative Action ... Supreme Court Rulings Loom On Affirmative Action, Gay Marriage, ... Holder, the challenge to ... Duration: 41 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Mon, 17 Jun 2013 05:37:50 -0700
Watch Attorney General Eric Holder's Remarks on ... Watch Attorney General Eric Holder's Remarks on ... U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder addressed the Supreme Court's decision to strike down a ... Duration: 414 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 10:12:35 -0700	Los Angeles news Supreme Court Hears Voting ... Los Angeles news Supreme Court Hears Voting ... U.S. Supreme Court Justices heard final arguments in a case centered around a key provision ... Duration: 121 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Thu, 16 May 2013 06:44:51 -0700	The "Citizens United" for Voting Rights? Civil ... The "Citizens United" for Voting Rights? Civil ... The U.S. Supreme Court is considering overturning the 1965 Voting Rights Act, a key ... Duration: 93 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:50:01 -0800	A Racial Entitlement? Supreme Court Threatens ... A Racial Entitlement? Supreme Court Threatens ... Supreme Court Threatens Voting Rights Act, One of Civil Rights Era's Key ... and ... Duration: 707 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Thu, 28 Feb 2013 07:51:29 -0800
Supreme Court overturns Voting Rights Act ... Supreme Court overturns Voting Rights Act ... Guide. Loading icon Loading... Alert icon. You need Adobe Flash Player to watch ... Supreme ... Duration: 277 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 09:19:35 -0700	Save Dr. King's Dream Act - Supreme Court to ... Save Dr. King's Dream Act - Supreme Court to ... Guide. Thumbnail Popular on YouTube · Thumbnail ... On Wednesday February 27, the U.S ... Duration: 856 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Wed, 27 Feb 2013 03:30:38 -0800	Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Voting Rights ... Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Voting Rights ... The Supreme Court heard arguments over a provision in the landmark Voting Rights Act ... Duration: 448 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:54:49 -0800	Supreme Court bingo hints at upcoming decisions ... Supreme Court bingo hints at upcoming decisions ... The Supreme Court is expected to rule on same-sex marriage, affirmative action and the ... Duration: 340 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:00:23 -0700
Supreme Court DECISION. Voting Rights: Section ... Supreme Court DECISION. Voting Rights: Section ... The Supreme Court ruled on Shelby County, Alabama v. ... down Section 4 of the Voting ... Duration: 73 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 07:23:07 -0700	Voting Rights Act Takes Hit by Supreme Court - 6 ... Voting Rights Act Takes Hit by Supreme Court - 6 ... The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down a section of the Voting Rights ... Guide. Loading ... Duration: 346 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 08:20:31 -0700	Supreme Court Deals Blow to Voting Rights Act ... Supreme Court Deals Blow to Voting Rights Act ... Supreme Court rules in a 5-4 decision that a key section of the ... Guide. Loading icon ... Duration: 361 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 08:25:02 -0700	Civil Rights Leader Rep. Lewis Blasts Supreme ... Civil Rights Leader Rep. Lewis Blasts Supreme ... 6/25/13 - Civil rights pioneer Rep. John Lewis (R-GA) spoke out against the Supreme Court's ... Duration: 139 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 11:41:14 -0700
Holder: 'Deeply disappointed' in ruling on voting ... Holder: 'Deeply disappointed' in ruling on voting ... Attorney General Eric Holder comments on the Supreme Court's decision to limit a key ... Duration: 102 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 10:50:58 -0700	Supreme Court Decisions 2013: Voting Rights, Gay ... Supreme Court Decisions 2013: Voting Rights, Gay ... Supreme Court justices will soon deliver rulings on affirmative action and equal rights ... Duration: 124 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:16:24 -0700	High Court Poised For A Month Of High -Stakes ... High Court Poised For A Month Of High -Stakes ... Photos: Today\'s Supreme Court Photos: Today's Supreme Court -- Voting rights: The ... Duration: 129 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 28 May 2013 18:08:29 -0700	Voices of the New Generation: Keep the Voting ... Voices of the New Generation: Keep the Voting ... This video was created to bring awareness to the upcoming decision by the United State ... Duration: 162 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Thu, 07 Mar 2013 03:29:48 -0800
Supreme Court Decisions 2013 Voting Rights, Gay ... Supreme Court Decisions 2013 Voting Rights, Gay ... Guide. Thumbnail Popular on YouTube · Thumbnail ... Supreme Court Decisions 2013 ... Duration: 124 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 05:41:19 -0700	Civil Rights Leader Blasts Supreme Court Voting ... Civil Rights Leader Blasts Supreme Court Voting ... Civil rights pioneer Rep. John Lewis (R-GA) spoke out against the Supreme Court's Voting ... Duration: 139 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 11:47:51 -0700	Supreme Court OVERTURNS Voting Rights ... Supreme Court OVERTURNS Voting Rights ... The Supreme Court ruled on Shelby County, Alabama v. ... Guide. Thumbnail Popular on ... Duration: 276 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 11:59:48 -0700	SUPREME Court Decisions 2013 Voting Rights ... SUPREME Court Decisions 2013 Voting Rights ... News for Supreme Court Decisions 2013 Voting ... MiamiHerald.com Voting ... Guide ... Duration: 124 seconds Video type: YouTube Hosted by: youtube.com on Tue, 25 Jun 2013 07:30:04 -0700

A Guide to the Supreme Court Decision on the Voting Rights Act : Photo Gallery

Everything you need to know about the Supreme Court Voting Rights ... Everything you need to know about the Supreme Court Voting Rights ... Everything you need to know about the Supreme Court Voting Rights	Everything you need to know about the Supreme Court Voting Rights ... Everything you need to know about the Supreme Court Voting Rights ... Everything you need to know about the Supreme Court Voting Rights	Supreme Court: The Voting Rights Act Worked—So Now It's ... Supreme Court: The Voting Rights Act Worked—So Now It's ... Supreme Court: The Voting Rights Act Worked—So Now It's	The Best Lines From Ginsburg's Dissent on the Voting Rights Act ... The Best Lines From Ginsburg's Dissent on the Voting Rights Act ... The Best Lines From Ginsburg's Dissent on the Voting Rights Act
Supreme Court Rulings This June: Everything You Need to Know - The ... Supreme Court Rulings This June: Everything You Need to Know - The ... Supreme Court Rulings This June: Everything You Need to Know - The	Why the Supreme Court May Rule Against the Voting Rights Act ... Why the Supreme Court May Rule Against the Voting Rights Act ... Why the Supreme Court May Rule Against the Voting Rights Act	After 50 Years, the Voting Rights Act's Biggest Threat: The ... After 50 Years, the Voting Rights Act's Biggest Threat: The ... After 50 Years, the Voting Rights Act's Biggest Threat: The	How a Supreme Court Defeat Could Save Voting Rights - Kiran ... How a Supreme Court Defeat Could Save Voting Rights - Kiran ... How a Supreme Court Defeat Could Save Voting Rights - Kiran
voting-rights_200.jpg voting-rights_200.jpg voting-rights_200.jpg	Supreme Court Likely to Strike Down the Voting Rights Act's ... Supreme Court Likely to Strike Down the Voting Rights Act's ... Supreme Court Likely to Strike Down the Voting Rights Act's	OB-DJ649_0327vo_F_ ... OB-DJ649_0327vo_F_ ... OB-DJ649_0327vo_F_ ...	Supreme Court stops use of key part of Voting Rights Act - The ... Supreme Court stops use of key part of Voting Rights Act - The ... Supreme Court stops use of key part of Voting Rights Act - The
Update: Supreme Court Will Put Voting Rights Act on Trial ... Update: Supreme Court Will Put Voting Rights Act on Trial ... Update: Supreme Court Will Put Voting Rights Act on Trial	A guide: Major rulings coming out of the Supreme Court \| The Daily ... A guide: Major rulings coming out of the Supreme Court \| The Daily ... A guide: Major rulings coming out of the Supreme Court \| The Daily	Washington: Supreme Court strikes down key provision of Voting ... Washington: Supreme Court strikes down key provision of Voting ... Washington: Supreme Court strikes down key provision of Voting	Washington: Supreme Court strikes down key provision of Voting ... Washington: Supreme Court strikes down key provision of Voting ... Washington: Supreme Court strikes down key provision of Voting
[Uhuru Kenyatta]: Presidential Inauguration Speech [9 April 2013] [Uhuru Kenyatta]: Presidential Inauguration Speech [9 April 2013] [Uhuru Kenyatta]: Presidential Inauguration Speech [9 April 2013]		Henry McNeal Turner Henry McNeal Turner Henry McNeal Turner	Henry McNeal Turner Henry McNeal Turner Henry McNeal Turner
Henry McNeal Turner Henry McNeal Turner Henry McNeal Turner	Henry McNeal Turner Henry McNeal Turner Henry McNeal Turner	OBAMAS MARXIST ADMINISTRATION ON DISPLAY FOR ALL TO SEE OBAMAS MARXIST ADMINISTRATION ON DISPLAY FOR ALL TO SEE OBAMAS MARXIST ADMINISTRATION ON DISPLAY FOR ALL TO SEE	John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House
John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House	The Making of Indian Foreign Policy : The Role of Scholarship and Public Opinion By Mr. C. Raja Mohan The Making of Indian Foreign Policy : The Role of Scholarship and Public Opinion By Mr. C. Raja Mohan The Making of Indian Foreign Policy : The Role of Scholarship and Public Opinion By Mr. C. Raja Mohan	The Words of Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. The Words of Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. The Words of Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr.	John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House
John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House	John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House	John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House	John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House John B. & Isabella Leech House
A GUIDE TO THE SUPREME COURT DECISION ON THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT A GUIDE TO THE SUPREME COURT DECISION ON THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT The decision in Shelby County v. Holder revolves around Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, which establishes a "coverage formula" to determine which states and local governments fall under Section 5, and therefore need to get approval before changing ...	A Guide to The Times's Supreme Court Coverage A Guide to The Times's Supreme Court Coverage The justices have yet to rule on 11 cases from the 2012-13 term, including the four most closely watched: two on same-sex marriage and one each on affirmative action and the Voting Rights Act. The court will issue rulings sometime after 10 a.m. Eastern ...	The right move on affirmative action The right move on affirmative action In an anti-climactic but admirable ruling, the Supreme Court on Monday decided not to revisit previous decisions allowing state universities to take race into account in their admissions policies. To their credit, some conservative justices who seemed ...	High court strikes down part of 1965 Voting Rights Act High court strikes down part of 1965 Voting Rights Act The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday declared Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional, a major blow to supporters of oversight of voting laws that they say protects against discrimination. The ruling in Texas means that now the state's ...
High court voids key part of Voting Rights Act but puts off rulings on gay ... High court voids key part of Voting Rights Act but puts off rulings on gay ... The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a civil rights law that requires some states to get federal permission to change their voting rules, but it struck down the formula for which jurisdictions are covered — leaving it to Congress to redraw the map. The ...	Everything You Need To Know About The Marriage Equality Cases At The ... Everything You Need To Know About The Marriage Equality Cases At The ... Beginning this morning, the Supreme Court will hear two cases that could recognize the right of everyone, straight or gay, to marry the person they love. The first concerns California's anti-gay Proposition 8, and could potentially extend the right to ...	A summary of major upcoming Supreme Court decisions A summary of major upcoming Supreme Court decisions (CNN) -- Here are summaries of five of the biggest cases awaiting rulings by the Supreme Court. Decisions will be released between now and ..... AT ISSUE: The continued use by the federal government of the key enforcement provision of the landmark ...	Pakistani premier says government plans to put former military ruler on trial ... Pakistani premier says government plans to put former military ruler on trial ... Sharif said the government agrees with the Supreme Court's decision that Musharraf committed treason under Article 6 of the constitution when he declared a state of emergency in 2007 and suspended the constitution. “The prime minister is under oath to ...
Border Security Amendment To Immigration Bill Clears Major Hurdle Border Security Amendment To Immigration Bill Clears Major Hurdle WASHINGTON -- An amendment to add significant border security requirements to an already sweeping comprehensive immigration bill passed a test vote in the Senate on Monday, putting the full legislation on track for passage later this week. The final ...	As Social Media Swirl Around It, Supreme Court Sticks to Its Analog Ways As Social Media Swirl Around It, Supreme Court Sticks to Its Analog Ways WASHINGTON — Chad Griffin, a gay rights advocate, has arrived twice this month at the Supreme Court with his bags packed, ready to fly off to a rally if the court rules on same-sex marriage. ... They will be joined, if Twitter is any guide, by ...	Slatest PM: One Down, Two to Go For SCOTUS Slatest PM: One Down, Two to Go For SCOTUS The court is slated to release the next batch of opinions tomorrow at 10 a.m., when all eyes will again be on D.C. as the nation awaits a ruling on gay marriage and voting rights. In Broad Strokes: Washington Post: "The Supreme Court brokered a ...	How to Wait for the Big Supreme Court Decisions Like a Pro How to Wait for the Big Supreme Court Decisions Like a Pro 8, the Supreme Court still has to rule on cases involving affirmative action, voting rights-acts, and whether or not companies should be allowed to patent genes. That's a lot of decisions, and we're already in the second week of June. And unloading all ...
Three Mondays in June Three Mondays in June Each Monday for the rest of the month, the Supreme Court will hand down rulings from this term on affirmative action, same-sex marriage, civil rights, and genetic patents. Josh Dzieza on what's at stake. Like · Tweet. Affirmative Action .... Even if ...	CNN Washington AM Note CNN Washington AM Note Voting rights: The future of the Voting Rights Act, and continued federal oversight of elections in states with a past history of discrimination. "It's almost unimaginable the number of things that the ... Still wrestling with the weightiest decisions ...	Black legal scholar says conflict-of-interest could earn Zimmerman a new trial Black legal scholar says conflict-of-interest could earn Zimmerman a new trial Transgender first-grader wins civil rights suit after girls' bathroom ban ... Senate takes first major vote on immigration reform ... Transgender first-grader wins civil rights suit after girls' bathroom ban ... RSS. Related Articles. Zimmerman family ...	India Banned Dolphin Captivity on Moral Grounds India Banned Dolphin Captivity on Moral Grounds They're non-justiciable, which means people who break these laws cannot be taken to court. But that doesn't mean they don't have an impact. The Principles are meant to help guide the courts in making decisions in line with the character of the country.

A Guide to the Supreme Court Decision on the Voting Rights Act : Latest News, Information, Answers and Websites

If Gay marriage is ok, Then why cant two swinger couples marry?

Lets remove any conversations about christianity from the issue (but truthfully, the very concept of humans making some kind of committed ceremonious act of joining stems from religion) If we say 2 people of the same sex can marry, then why not two swinger couples? Or Have two swinger couples adopt a single baby, and place all 4 as parents? if gays can marry, then why not 2 men and a woman? or a man and multiple wives (which is common in human history in non christian countries).
Or as the law stands, 16 year olds can marry with parental consent. So how about two or three of the same sex? Whatever reason given for blocking incestuous marriages also could be used against homosexual marriage. What reasons could we give for a father not marrying his own son or daughter once they are 16? Or a sister marrying a brother? Or a person marrying someone for citizenship? Can anyone judge the right and wrongness of such acts? Can anyone Step out with a "love" tape measure so as to say who is capable of "love" and who is not, without implying a level of biblical right and wrong taken from americas christian standards? Remember, Remove the bible from this argument, as many if not most of the pro gay marriage people want to do. So if we remove the moral issue of homosexuality, we also remove the issue of 1 on 1 marriage, and all the other things I listed. so lets be fair to all the polygamist, bigamists, and incestuous people. Let us not leave out "the other woman." Why cant I be married, and cheat with the other woman, and marry her too? Do I not love them both? Can anyone tell me I cant love both? why should they have to know about each other? that sounds like some kind of moral law. We dont want that right? What reason would you give to say ANY of what I am asking is wrong? and could those reasons not be used against gay marriage as well?

I want real, thought out answers, as to why any of these questions would be wrong to allow. Do not name call, or insult me or any other poster.
So let me add things that I dont want to hear:
1.Homophobe
2.Why does it matter to you what others do
3.We have heard this before (and then still dont give an answer)
4. Gays are capable of having a happy marriage, and straight people divorce so who can judge
5. bible thumper
6. Civil rights and blacks got rights, so gay marriage is equal (that one offends me the most, because is belittles black experience from millions dying from Africa to now, under tyranny and terrorism, building a country thru slave labor, being underpaid and arrested in mass, murdered by the police themselves, to this very day, and equates it with just a "civil rights, martin luther king" issue)
None of those are answers, and from tv, to radio to internet, those types of answers are thrown up and the next thing you know, the conversation is on those silly non-answers and not the original topic.

If you want to debate in the supreme court and things like that regarding why a law should change, I feel you need more reasons than "well Why not?"
!!!!Lets be open, without name calling anyone!!!!

Answer: Actually, if you remove the Bible from any answers directed to your question, you remove any foundation for a definition of marriage. So everything is OK, including all the aberrations you mentioned. In fact, the institution of bringing two people together, legally, becomes no more than a legal contract. So, anyone willing to enter into that contract should be allowed. Any number of people, critters or items.

I absolutely agree with you. If two same sex people can get married then why not all the other corruptions you listed, plus many, many more. Not that I agree that they should be able to, but I agree with the arguments posted.

Still, removing the Bible entirely from our civilization would be absolutely devastating. The Bible holds the foundation for probably 90% of all our laws and norms. Without it to guide and direct us, there would be rampant chaos.

Man would have to quick react and rewrite laws that would be based only on people and their attitudes. My Gawd, leave something like that entirely up to our currently elected officials??? Until they finished with their man-made laws, everything would be legal!

The only way I could say any of those things contained in your question is OK, is either by my own personal opinion, or by some brand new, man made law that addressed the specific act. As of today, right now, this minute, by removing the Bible, I have no leg to stand on. I would also have to eliminate almost every man made law, especially those dealing with social issues. Laws that are totally separate from the Bible. are almost non existent.

Having man make their own laws only from people's opinions would mean that most aberrant behavior would probably not be recognized. We would have to get a majority decision on everything. I know being "Gay" is the hot topic in the news right now, but I still do not believe the majority of voting Americans believe Gay should be legislated or recognized.

As far as facing difficult decisions when you come out and admit being Gay, it is your own doing. Everybody can be and do whatever they want, as long as it fits within established guidelines. At the time of the USAF incident it was not acceptable to be Gay in the military.

If you decide to be a child molester, the profile will follow you for life. Should we have legislation that recognizes child molesters and rewards them?
Category: Marriage & Divorce

Live Analysis of the Supreme Court Decision on the Voting Rights Act

The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down a central part of the Voting Rights Act. Times reporters and editors are analyzing the Supreme Court decision and its implications, as well as the public's reaction. Coverage; All.

A Senate Hearing Primer; Judge Roberts, the Committee Is Interested in Your View on ...

As it unfolds before a national television audience, any Supreme Court confirmation hearing offers a window on the legal debates of the day. It is safe to assume that there is a reason for every question the senators ask in the limited time they have: whether voicing the concerns of a particular constituency, highlighting or eliciting the nominees - By LINDA GREENHOUSE

Supreme Court voids key part of Voting Rights Act - The Daily Record

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act cannot be enforced unless Congress comes up with an up-to-date formula for deciding which states and localities ...

What kind of fools are we?

Nations go to war to win, not to lose. They develop the know-how to win, like we did when we developed the A-bomb to defeat Japan, which saving a million yank lives. Untold billions were spent to develop the bomb and create a nuclear arsenal to protect ourselves and the free world. It worked; the kamikaze-minded suicide bombers quit, after 2 nukes showed them who’s who and now they are our allies. NUKES ERADICATED THE EVIL and for the better.

But islam is going after us the same way, killing more than 2500 yanks to date in suicide bombings.We posses nuclear arms, islam does not, AT LEAST NOT YET. Yet they behead and kill us, mutilate our dead bodies, drag them thru streets, threaten us if we bomb their so called “holy” cities and subject us to humiliation for “abusing” the terrorists we capture, as if we were supposed to be coddling them. Even mishandling the qurun is seen as a “crime. As this goes on we huddle in fear of what they will do next, and they laugh at us and call us a “paper tiger”.

So what do we do? The unelected supreme court gives them “terrorists rights” to sue us while they behead and kill us “back home”. And we prosecute our own soldiers for not coddling them.
REAL REAL SMART, isn’t it? But this isn’t the start of this insanity---

Then in Vietnam we could have won, but liberals claimed nukes weren’t nice because too many enemy would die. The result: 59,000 yanks died instead. REAL REAL SMART.

We went to war in Iraq but pulled out when it was half over, leaving the regime in power. The result: another war had to be fought, which we thought we won, but yanks die daily as nukes sit idle. Some “victory” we won.

Now we are blindly led to believe moslem nations, such as Pakistan will assist us in rooting out al queda. Al queda can and is paying everyone off to be on their side, and if they weren’t, Moslems wouldn’t act for us. Pakistan has nukes, supplied with red mercury and hi-tech by the Russian mafia. And who do you think has access to these nukes? Allied with Pakistan? REAL REAL SMART

In the meantime, bandit and terrorist nations are clamoring to build nukes. Who do you think they ‘ll use them against, Monaco? Do you think these suicide maniacs will consider fallout when they can and will nuke us? The liberals show photos of burnt jap children to urge us not to nuke. But what will our children look like if they nuke us? Must we await another pearl harbor-9/11 debacle before our sense of self-preservation and the preservation of our posterity is awakened and we excise the malignancy of islam from the face and body of mankind for once and for all? Must we apologize to them, coddle them and excuse ourselves for conducting war? And must they get rights to sue in our courts when they behead us?

How long will this “pearl harbor-9/11 mentality” of sitting back, doing nothing but procrastinating persist? Must we wait until they blow us up, kill our children, brothers, sisters and parents before we finally realize that we are justified in totally annihilating them and ending their threat to us for once and for all?

Did we spend those untold billions for marching down Main St. on the 4th of July while yanks die daily and the arsenal sits idle, or was there another more utilitarian purpose to build that arsenal and protect ourselves? How long must we keep huddling in fear of what they will do to us next?

THE BIGGEST MISTAKE EVER WE NOW WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR:
We could have won in Korea with nuclear weapons, but liberals panicked the administration, claiming Russia would nuke us if we nuked Korea. The result: 33,000 yanks died, nukes stood idle, the war was a stalemate, and now Korea comes back with its own nukes, threatening us with them, which never would have happened had we nuked them when we had the chance. REAL REAL SMART. And here we sit like fools, as Iran and the rest of the Islamic gangs buy red mercury from the Russian mafia to make their own and North Korea takes aim at us and at our allies with their finger on the firing button.

We shall soon see if the “Pearl Harbor 9/11 mentality of sitting around and procrastinating, will continue to linger on. Or will we now do nothing more than shake our index finger at them?

Our we idiots or merely fools?
And if we are fools, then what kind of fools are we?

Answer: Welcome to the affects of Liberalisim and Political Correctness. The average person is a fool, a gullible fool, they believe all of this bullcrap and adopt it. Our enimies know that they cannot defeat us militarily, so they've devised a plan of infiltrate, divide and conquer from within. Sadly, its working. How long will it last, until the entire system collapses, which may be soon, or until the idiots among us stop thinking what can I get for free, and letting their emotions guide their decision making, and they finally resist all Politically Correct ideas, and stop voting for liberals. I cannot see that happening.
Category: Current Events

I need help with these definitions for my SS paper?

Preamble-
Amendment-
Commerce-
Supreme Court-
Judicial Review-
Republican form of Government-
i cant find a good definiton in my textbook
i also need to compare these vocab words to our government (U.S.A.)
which is making me stuck, this is due on the 21st but i have a long way to go
all answers will be helpful to me
10 points and a thumbs up to best answer too! :)
please help!

Answer: preamble; the introductory part of a statute, deed, or the like, stating the reasons and intent of what follows. Our govt; The Preamble to the United States Constitution is a brief introductory statement of the fundamental purposes and guiding principles that the Constitution is meant to serve. In general terms it states, and courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Fathers' intentions regarding the Constitution's meaning and what they hoped it would achieve (especially as compared with the Articles of Confederation).

Amendment; A change made to a pending motion or bill by a motion to amend. Our govt; Amendments are additions and changes made to our constitution that outline the laws and rights of the people of the United States

Commerce; Commerce is a division of trade or production which deals with the exchange of goods and services from producer to final consumer. It comprises the trading of something of economic value such as goods, services, information, or money between two or more entities Our govt; http://www.commerce.gov/TradeOpportunities/index.htm

Supreme Court; The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest judicial body in the United States, and leads the federal judiciary. It consists of the Chief Justice of the United States and eight Associate Justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed with the "advice and consent" (majority vote) of the Senate

Judicial Review; Judicial review is the doctrine in democratic theory under which legislative and executive action is subject to invalidation by the judiciary. Specific courts with judicial review power must annul the acts of the state when it finds them incompatible with a higher authority, such as the terms of a written constitution. Judicial review is an example of the functioning of separation of powers in a modern governmental system (where the judiciary is one of three branches of government)

Republican; The Republican Party is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States, along with the Democratic Party. Founded by anti-slavery expansion activists in 1854, it is often called the Grand Old Party or the GOP, despite being the younger of the two major parties. In the U.S. political spectrum, the party's platform is generally considered center-right. Republicans emphasize the role of free market decision making in fostering economic prosperity. They favor laissez-faire free markets, economic liberty, fiscal conservatism, personal responsibility, and policies supporting business
Category: Homework Help

US supreme court strikes down key part of Voting Rights Act – live ...

5 hours ago ... Advertising guide · License/buy our content ... Today's supreme court ruling on the 1965 Voting Rights Act will have ... The court struck down Section 4 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act in its 5-4 ruling in Shelby County, Alabama v.

Anyone ever heard of F.I.J.A.....?

Answer: Fully Informed Jury Association. Their mission is to inform jurors of their rights and responsibilities if they are called for duty.

If you are called for Jury Duty:

Don't worry! Be happy! Look at jury service as an opportunity to "do good" for yourself and others. It's your chance to help the justice system deliver justice, which is absolutely essential to a free society.

Also, you can do more "political good" as a juror than in practically any other way as a citizen: your vote on the verdict is also a measure of public opinion on the law itself--an opinion which our lawmakers are likely to take seriously. Short of being elected to office yourself, you may never otherwise have a more powerful impact on the rules we live by than you will as a trial juror.

However, unless you are fully informed of your powers as a juror, you may be manipulated by the less powerful players in the courtroom into delivering the verdict they want, instead of what justice would require. That is why this was written--to give you information that you're not likely to receive from the attorneys, or even from the judge.

Justice may depend upon your being chosen to serve, so here are some "words to the wise" about how to make it through voir dire, the jury selection process: You may feel that answering some of the questions asked of you would compromise your right to privacy. If you refuse to answer them, it will probably cost you your chance to serve. Likewise, if you "talk too much"--especially if you admit to knowing your rights and powers as a juror, as explained below, or that you have qualms about the law itself in the case at hand, or reveal that you're bright, educated, or are interested in serving! So, from voir dire to verdict, let your conscience be your guide.

Nothing in the U.S. Constitution or in any Supreme Court decision requires jurors to take an oath to follow the law as the judge explains it or, for that matter, authorizes the judge to "instruct" the jury at all. Judges provide their interpretation of the law, but you may also do your own thinking. Keep in mind that no juror's oath is enforceable, and that you may regard all "instructions" as advice.

Understanding the full context in which an illegal act was committed is essential to deciding whether the defendant acted rightly or wrongly. Strict application of the law may produce a guilty verdict, but what about justice? If the jurors agree that, beyond a reasonable doubt, the accused did act as charged, then "context becomes everything" in reaching a verdict you can live with. Credit or blame for the verdict will go to you, so be sure to ask the judge how you can pose questions to witnesses, so that you can learn the complete context, should the lawyers fail to bring it out.

When they believe justice requires it, jurors can refuse to apply the law. Jurors have the power to consider whether the law itself is wrong (including whether it is "unconstitutional"), or is being applied for political reasons. Is the defendant being singled out as "an example" in order to demonstrate government muscle? Were the defendant's constitutional rights violated during the arrest? Much of today's "crime wave" consists of victimless crimes--crimes against the state, or "political crimes", so if you feel that a verdict of guilty would give the government too much power, or help keep a bad law alive, just remember that you can refuse to apply any law that violates your conscience.

Prosecutors often "multiply charges" so the jury will assume the defendant "must be guilty of something". But one of the great mistakes a jury can make is to betray both truth and conscience by compromising. If you believe the defendant is not guilty of anything, then vote "not guilty" on all counts.

You can't be punished for voting according to your conscience. Judges (and other jurors) often pressure hold-out jurors into abandoning their true feelings and voting with the majority "...to avoid the expense of a hung jury and mistrial". But you don't have to give in. Why? Because...

Hung juries are "OKAY". If voting your conscience should lead to a hung jury, not to worry, you're doing the responsible thing. There is no requirement that you must reach a verdict. And the jury you hang may be significant as one of a series of hung juries sending messages to the legislature that the law you're working with has problems, and it's time for a change. If you want to reach consensus, however, one possible way is to remind your fellow jurors that...

Jurors have the power to reduce charges against the defendant, provided that "lesser included offenses" exist in law (ask the judge to list and explain them, and the range of potential punishments that go with each). Finding guilt at a lower level than charged can be appropriate in cases where the defendant has indeed victimized someone, but not so seriously as the original charges would indicate. And, if it will be up to the judge to decide the sentence, it's within the power of the jury to find the defendant guilty of a reduced charge which will, at most, entail the amount of punishment it thinks is appropriate.
Category: Civic Participation

MIdterm US history questions from study guide! NEEED HELPPP!!!?

I really need to do good on this Midterm because it is my worst grade in school right now. Please answer any questions you can! I need to make sure I am studying correct material!

1. Explain the ultimate goal of the first English colonies (Jamestown).

7. How would you describe the relations between the Powhatan and the English settlers in Jamestown as more and more English arrived?

11. Briefly describe Puritan society with the regards to church and state, family, and the right to vote and social equality.

14. What was the result of the pequot war?

20. What was the ultimate result of Englands colonial policy called salutary neglect.

63. What was the most significant political consequence of Eli Whitneys invention of the cotton gin?

67. Briefly describe the principles behind the Monroe Doctrine.

72. How did John Calhoun explain how the concept of nullification promoted state rights?

75. Briefly describe how Andrew Jacksons "pet banks" contributed to the Panic of 1837.

76. What ideas did the new political party called the "whigs" support?

88. Why did the South remain dependent on slavery up until the civil war?

89. Explain the Provisions of the Wilmot Provisio.

94. What was the key aspect of the Kansas-Nebraska act besides repealing the Missouri Compromise?

95. What was the one political issue that united all members of the Republican Party?

97. What was significant about the Supreme Court decision Dred Scott vs. Sandford?

101. What finally convinced Southerners that they had lost their political voice and ultimately caused them to secede from the union?

Answer: 1. Raid the mainland and kill the Indians/mate with their women to produce really unattractive offspring

7. They shed a single tear for each Englishman that arrived.

11. Boo Women, Yay Men!

14. The pequot trophy

20. Women were still not allowed to vote, and the slave trade.

63. People could wear shirts that would keep them dry AND get them wasted at the same time.

67. Marilyn Monroe was forced to eat 2 pounds of native flesh daily, and in return, women still weren't allowed to vote, but they were allowed to eat from a place other than the floor.

72. He said something about how nullification promoted state rights.

75. Well, when people walked into their local bank and tried to deposit money to find that the entire bank was run by farm animals, they freaked out and started riots in the street.

76. White people that looked like pigs

88. Because the white people were too busy inventing nascar and floating downstream on rafts and getting into crazy situations to do their own work.

89. Provision 1: Quiznos shall be open for breakfast, but will not serve breakfast food
Provision 2: Olives are beans, and will be included in bean salad from this point on
Provision 3: People caught peeing on the toilet seat will have their penises forcibly removed with a blender.

94. It established the fact that both of these states suck.

95. That all resources must be pooled into creating thongs for the women of the nation.

97. Sandford, as well as his son, were going to be forced into a lifetime of being in a sitcom and getting filthy rich, while Dred Scott would win the case, joyfully receiving an ax to the brain stem twice daily.

101. Their farmville account got cancelled because it was run by Abraham Lincoln.
Category: Homework Help

YDA responds to Supreme Court decision on Voting Rights Act ...

YDA responds to Supreme Court decision on Voting Rights Act. This morning, the Supreme Court overturned a critical piece of the Voting Rights Acts of 1965. Section 4 was declared unconstitutional, meaning Congress will need to establish a ...

U.S. Supreme Court - The New York Times

Editorial praises Supreme Court's 7 to 1 ruling about University of Texas at Austin's use of race as a factor in ... Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Part of Voting Rights Act .... A Guide to the Supreme Court Decision on Affirmative Action .

A Majority of One

We are all living now in Sandra Day OConnors America. Take almost any of the most divisive questions of American life, and Justice OConnor either has decided it or is about to decide it on our behalf. The Supreme Court may tell us soon whether affirmative action in public universities is permissible, and if it does, OConnor is likely to cast - Jeffrey Rosen article on Sandra Day OConnor as justice who decides which way Supreme Court goes in many major cases and as courts lead champion of federalism: the return of power from federal government to states; says she takes distinctive approach to role as swing vote, joining majority and then writing concurring opinion that drain her colleagues reasoning of its more general implications and preserve her ability to change her mind in future; says she has recently joined conservative colleagues on court in determination to reserve for themselves exclusive authority to decide what counts as illegal and impermissible in America; says her highhanded attitude toward Congress, state courts and Aemrican people reached its height in Bush v Gore, decision that typifies her personalized jurisprudence; notes speculation that OConnor might be courts next chief justice and suggests that her vision of courts role in American life may not really be appropriate today; photos (L) - Jeffrey Rosen is an associate professor at George Washington University Law School and the legal affairs editor of The New Republic. He writes frequently for The Times Magazine on the law. - By Jeffrey Rosen

Without a Doubt

Bruce Bartlett, a domestic policy adviser to Ronald Reagan and a treasury official for the first President Bush, told me recently that if Bush wins, there will be a civil war in the Republican Party starting on Nov. 3. The nature of that conflict, as Bartlett sees it? Essentially, the same as the one raging across much of the world: a battle - Ron Suskind article examines Pres Bushs faith, painting him as blend of forcefulness and inscrutability, opacity and action, all rooted in unshakeable instincts; says evangelicals who support him and comprise core of his base believe he is messenger from God; says Bushs faith has shaped his presidency in profound, nonreligious ways; says he demands unquestioning faith from his followers; says disdain he shows for other points of view emanates from his certainty; describes bond between Bush and his base as one of mutual support, in which he supports them with his actions and positions and they respond with fierce faith; photos (L) - Ron Suskind was the senior national-affairs reporter for The Wall Street Journal from 1993 to 2000. He is the author most recently of The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House and the Education of Paul ONeill. - By Ron Suskind

EXAMINING THE VOTE; How Bush Took Florida: Mining the Overseas Absentee Vote

On the morning after Election Day, George W. Bush held an unofficial lead of 1,784 votes in Florida, but to his campaign strategists the margin felt perilously slim. They were right to worry. Within a week, recounts would erode Mr. Bushs unofficial lead to just 300 votes. With the presidency hanging on the outcome in Florida, the Bush team quickly - New York Times probe finds Republican drive in days after presidential election to persuade canvassing boards in George W Bush strongholds to waive Floridas election laws when counting overseas absentee ballots and to disqualify oversees ballots in counties won by Vice Pres Al Gore played key role in election outcome; notes Florida officials, under intense Republican pressure, accepted hundreds of ballots that did not comply with state law; analysis of 2,490 ballots counted as legal votes after Election Day finds 680 questionable votes, with 80 percent of them accepted in counties Bush carried; Bush won state by 537 votes; probe finds overseas ballots were judged by markedly different standards, depending on where they were counted; some voters admit casting illegal ballots after Election Day, interviews; probe finds no evidence either party organized effort to solicit late votes; table; photos; time line (L) - By DAVID BARSTOW and DON VAN NATTA Jr.

House of Deputies president on US Supreme Court Voting Rights ...

Holder: In the summer of 1965, two weeks after President Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law, Episcopal seminarian Jonathan Myrick Daniels died a martyr's death in Alabama where he was spending the summer registering African American voters. Four days later ... guides us to this day. The Episcopal Church has given its best and brightest to the cause of voting rights for half a century, and today's regrettable Supreme Court decision will not change that.

This is my history review for my semester exam.?

If I dont pass I dont become a sophmore >.<
So plz HELP MEE!

What is the significance of these people:
Charles Lindbergh
Sacco and Vanzetti
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Joseph McCarthy
Martin Luther King Jr.
Harry Truman
John F. kennedy
LyNdon Johnson
Richard Nixon
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagon
Cesar Chavez

What was the important decision in each of these cases:
Gideon v. Wainwright
Escabedo v. Illinois
Reynolds v. Sims
Mapp v. Ohio
Miranda v. Arizona

Guiding Questions :
How did U.s immigration policy change in the 1920s?
How did the development of the automobile change life in America? How did it impact the economy?
What were the causes of the Great Depression?
What caused the Dust Bowl?
What factors contributed to Nazis rise to power in Germany?
What is the importance of the attack on Pearl Harbor?
How did WWII change the role of women?
How was life on the home front impacted by WWII?
What is the significance of Roosevelts attempt to "pack" the supreme court?
What was the long term result of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka(1954)?
What was the result of the Interstate Highway Act of 1956?
Why was the Montgomery Bus Boycott important?
What is the importance of the Civil Rights Act of 1956?
How did media change the way Americans viewed the Vietnam War?
What events influenced the change in the voting age?
What is Watergate and how did it change American perception of government?
What was the purpose of the Equal Pay Act, Title IX education amendment and the proposed Equal Rights Amendment?

If yhu can help mee I would really appreciate it(:

Answer: Look up each question and write the answers out in full sentences.
If you can work with notes or a computer, all the best.
Category: Standards & Testing

Supreme Court strikes down a central pillar of the Voting Rights Act ...

5 hours ago ... he Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down a key part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, ruling that Section 4 of the law is unconstitutional. In a 5-4 ...

Supreme Court Cuts Voting Rights Act, But Online Voter Tools Could ...

There's no reason to be entirely glum about the Supreme Court's decision to strike down provisions of the Voting Rights Act: the growing accessibili..

COURT IN TRANSITION: THE HEARINGS; Issues and (Possible) Answers: A Primer on the Alito Hearings

When Judge John G. Roberts Jr. appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee in September for hearings on his nomination to the Supreme Court, all of the participants were largely improvising. It had been 11 years since the last nomination, and the legal landscape, political climate and very state of the world had changed so radically that the old - By ADAM LIPTAK

Supreme Court Rules Part Of Voting Rights Act Unconstitutional ...

The Supreme Court upended a longstanding pillar of civil-rights era legislation, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, ruling that the decades-old formula that Congress used to identify areas of the country subject to stringent oversight of ...

Help with history btwn the yrs of 1960s-1980s?

My teacher gave us an insanely long study guide for a test and im having a hard time finding some of the answers. I really need to do good on this test and the study guide is usually what helps.

Here are the questions (Some are soo broad. You dont have to answer em all but please help me if you know some of them. the study guide is 50 questions and im almost done. just cant find these):

1. Kennedys success in domestic legislation?
2. President Johnson and Congress?
3. Label applied to Johnson’s program?
4. Johnson’s domestic initiatives?
5. Poll taxes eliminated?
6. What did: Malcolm X; Stokely Carmichael; Martin Luther King, Jr. advocate?
7. Impact of the heavy bombing of Vietnam?
8. Who favored an “Honorable Peace
9. What kind of soldier fought in Vietnam?
10. What was the Warren Court like?
11. Main criticism of the Warren Court?
12. George McGovern’s campaign in 1972?
13. Watergate scandals?
14. Roe v. Wade?
15. Main racial controversy of the 1970s?
16. Jimmy Carter’s main appeal as a candidate in 1976?
17. Main emphasis of the Carter foreign policy?
18. One of the main accomplishments of Carter?

All help is appreciated!! Thank you!! :D

btw- this study guide isnt assigned or going to be collected as a grade. I am only doing it to study for my test so please no rude comments saying I should be doing my own homework or that I am lazy since this isnt even homework assigned. I just really wanna get an A on that test so Im doing some extra work but some are difficult for me to find. Historys not my best subject lol. Other than that thanks for the help! :)

Answer: Because I am feeling lazy, I'll answer the ones I know off the top of my head. :)

3. Label applied to Johnson’s program? The Great Society
4. Johnson’s domestic initiatives? Medicare, Headstart, Voting Rights Act, War on poverty, PBS

7. Impact of the heavy bombing of Vietnam? -- Ultimately none. The US could never force the North Vietnamese to bargain through the bombing campaign. While it destroyed much, and gave the US a black eye for dropping bombs on peasants, it had no effect on peace negotiations.
8. Who favored an “Honorable Peace Two people: Henry Kissinger, National Security Advisor and later Secretary of State to Richard Nixon, and Richard Nixon.

10. What was the Warren Court like? Liberal

12. George McGovern’s campaign in 1972? Promised to end the Vietnam War.
13. Watergate scandals? Sorry. Too long to get into. Basically, a break in of Democratic headquarters and cover up by Nixon.
14. Roe v. Wade? Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion in the US.
15. Main racial controversy of the 1970s? Desegregation of schools and bussing.
16. Jimmy Carter’s main appeal as a candidate in 1976? A Washington outsider. The perceived opposite of Nixon, who had left office in disgrace in 1974.

17. Main emphasis of the Carter foreign policy? He emphasized human rights around the globe.
18. One of the main accomplishments of Carter? Successful transfer of Panama Canal to Panama.
Category: History

UPDATES: US Supreme Court strikes down part of Voting Rights Act

6 hours ago ... Browse Guides ... VOTING RIGHTS: Does the Votings Right Act continue to have meaning in the era ... Juli's Law and the Supreme Court ruling.

Shelby County v. Holder - Supreme Court of the United States

5 hours ago ... The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was enacted to address entrenched racial discrimination in ... These basic principles guide review of the question .... notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-.

A guide: Major rulings coming out of the Supreme Court | The Daily ...

Congress passed the Voters Rights Act in 1965 outlawing discriminatory voting practices that disenfranchised African-American voters in historically segregated areas of the country. The act helped ease racial discrimination ...

THE 43rd PRESIDENT; Text of Supreme Court Ruling in Bush v. Gore Florida Recount Case

Following is the text of the Supreme Courts decision Tuesday night that there could be no further counting of Floridas disputed presidential ballot. The vote in Bush v. Gore was 5 to 4. It is not clear who wrote the majority opinion, but Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote a concurring opinion in which Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence - Text of Supreme Courts decision barring further counting of Floridas disputed presidential ballot, concurring opinion and dissents; photos (L)

Rift at A.C.L.U., On Fund-Raising And Leadership

Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, departed the war crimes trials at Guantánamo Bay with an e-mail message to members saying he was headed home to New York to defend the First Amendment and the right to protest. But another matter was more urgent: smoothing out a soured relationship with one of the - Anthony D Romeros operating style as executive director of American Civil Liberties Union opens rift in organization; some applaud his winning ways and others fret that fund-raising has become too much of priority; since he assumed post in Sept 2001, membership and revenues have risen sharply; use of data to maximize contributions has become more sophisticated; big donors have been wooed and won; but band of internal critics say civil liberties are not his top concern; they cite his failure to inform board about settlement with New York attorney general over privacy breaches on its Web site and his signing of government fund-raising agreement that organization later renounced; dissidents say Romero is ignoring ACLU traditions and often acting without full knowledge and support of board; there have been heated boardroom exchanges and unusual number of resignations from board; Romero and Nadine Strossen, board president, say none of ACLUs principles have been ignored in interest of luring money or new members; photo (L) - By STEPHANIE STROM

i really need help on my study guide and its for my final ); im very bad on test i get nervious and forget?

75. What is the significance of September 11, 2001?
(Points : 3)
It marked the end of the Persian Gulf War against Iraq.

The Soviet Union collapsed, officially ending the Cold War.

Terrorists used airplanes to attack targets in the United States, killing thousands.

The Supreme Court ordered the recount of the Florida vote to stop.

76. Who was responsible for the 2001 terrorist attacks aimed at driving Americans out of all Islamic nations?
(Points : 3)
Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden

Hamas and Sheik Ahmed Yassin

the Taliban and Mullah Mohammed Omar

Hezbollah and Hassan Nasrallah

the idea that the decisions to be made in Vietnam were black and whitecommunism or democracy

57. What allowed President Johnson to send additional troops to Vietnam without a formal declaration of war?
(Points : 3)
Viet Cong invasion in 1965

voters in the 1964 election

Gulf of Tonkin Resolution

Selective Service Act

58. What view of the Vietnam War led to objections about U.S. participation there?
(Points : 3)
The United States should have attacked more forcefully at the outset to win the war quickly.

The country was too small to worry about.

The United States was interfering in another nations civil war.

The Vietnamese should seek assistance from nations that were closer.

59. What was the outcome of the 1968 Tet Offensive?
(Points : 3)
a military victory for South Vietnam and a psychological victory for North Vietnam

a turning point in the war that eventually led to the South Vietnamese victory

a military victory for North Vietnam and a psychological victory for South Vietnam

a standoff that showed both sides the power of the other and exposed certain weaknesses

60. What was the eventual outcome of the Vietnam War?
(Points : 3)
The fall of Saigon led to a unified, communist Vietnam.

The Treaty of Saigon gave concessions to both sides.

A cease fire led to the establishment of a neutral zone between North Vietnam and South Vietnam.

The fall of Hanoi led to a unified, democratic Vietnam.

61. What did the 1960s counterculture embrace?
(Points : 3)
educational freedom and choice

greater economic stability

increased national security

opposition to the establishment and traditional values

62. How did the African American civil rights movement influence other groups, including gays and lesbians, American Indians, and Hispanics?
(Points : 3)
Their movement gained rights that other groups were not interested in.

Their lengthy battle discouraged other groups seeking civil rights.

Their movement inspired other groups to organize and advocate for civil rights.

Their efforts led other groups to adopt violent measures to make their case.

63. Which is a federal agency established during the Nixon administration?
(Points : 3)
Environmental Protection Agency

Central Intelligence Agency

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Department of Homeland Security

64. Which president resigned before completing his term?
(Points : 3)
George W. Bush

Richard Nixon

Gerald Ford

Bill Clinton

65. What was the ultimate outcome of the Supreme Court order for Richard Nixon to turn information over to Congress?
(Points : 3)
Nixon attempted to get Congress to override the decision.

Nixon turned over the information and was later impeached.

Nixon resigned as president.

Nixon demanded that the Supreme Court reconsider the case.

66. What series of events in the 1970s caused people to become more skeptical about politics and less trusting of government?
(Points : 3)
economic stagflation

the Watergate scandal

the Arab oil embargo

the Kent State University shootings

67. How did the Iran hostage crisis affect the 1980 election?
(Points : 3)
It increased the number of people voting.

It helped Ronald Reagan become president.

It helped Jimmy Carter get reelected.

It discouraged people from voting.

68. What were two key pieces of Reagans agenda in his first presidential campaign?
(Points : 3)
a strong military and a forceful foreign policy

higher taxes and open borders

reduced government regulation and military spending limits

lower taxes and improved social programs

69. Why did some people support supply side-economics and others oppose it?
(Points : 3)
It called for large tax cuts for the wealthy.

It ad

Answer: 75. C
76. A
57. C
58. C
59. A
60. A
61. D
62. C
63. A
64. B
65. C
66. B
67. B
68. A
69. A
Category: Homework Help

A summary of major upcoming Supreme Court decisions - CNN.com

6 days ago ... The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court sit for their official photograph ..... of the key enforcement provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965. .... In what could be a guide to the justices in Myriad, the high court last term ...

US history study guide questions?

I have a study guide for my upcoming exam, these are my leftover questions that Im either unsure or dont have a clue about even after reading from the text. Please answer what you can and what you know. I would greatly appreciate it thanks.

1. At the Yalta Conference:
a. FDR and Churchill were deeply concerned about postwar Poland.
b. Stalin belligerently demanded the opening of a second front against the
Germans.
c. FDR remained a confident leader; the picture of good health.
d. Chiang Kai-shek joined the Allied discussions.

2.The domestic program that Harry Truman sent to Congress in September 1945:
a.was a setback for labor.
b.proposed to continue and enlarge the New Deal.
c.dealt only with the problems of demobilization.
d.proposed to reverse most of his predecessors policies.

3.The Marshall Plan moved the nations of western Europe:
a. further apart.
b. to talk with one voice.
c. closer to Communism.
d. closer together.

4. In the area of civil rights, President Truman:
a. issued an Executive Order banning racial segregation in the armed forces.
b. allowed racial segregation in the hiring of federal employees to continue.
c. refused to address the problem of racial violence.
d. pushed through Congress a voting rights act that effectively ended barriers
to black voting.

5.Between 1945 and 1960, the gross national/domestic product (GDP):
a. stayed about the same, in constant dollars after adjustment for inflation.
b. actually declined, in constant dollars.
c. nearly doubled.
d. increased four times (quadrupled).

6. The baby boom:
a.peaked in 1957.
b.was a large part of a 30-percent growth in American population between 1945
and 1960.
c.paralleled a similar boom in consumer demand.
d.is correctly represented by all the above statements.

7. The phenomenon of “white flight” in the 1950s:
a.stopped when the federal government banned housing discrimination.
b.involved poor whites fleeing the South for jobs in big northern cities.
c.showed the improvement in race relations since the end of World War II.
d.was a major cause of the growth of the suburbs.

8. In the election of 1956:
a. Eisenhower’s liberal policies almost cost him the Republican nomination.
b. Eisenhower became the first Republican since Reconstruction to win a Deep
South state.
c. Democrats campaigned mainly on the civil rights issue.
d. Democrats won the White House and majorities in both houses of Congress.

9.In the Brown decision, the Supreme Court:
a.ruled in favor of the Topeka Board of Education.
b.outlawed segregation in public schools by a split five-to-four decision.
c.agreed with Eisenhower’s sentiments toward civil rights.
d.cited sociological and psychological findings in support of its decision.

10.The civil rights legislation of 1964 and 1965:
a.was passed by Congress over Johnson’s opposition.
b.ended black protest movements.
c.dramatically expanded black votes in the South.
d.made the South more strongly Democratic.

11. Faced with the presence of Soviet missiles in Cuba, President Kennedy:
a.ordered a “surgical” air strike.
b.waited to see what the Russians would do.
c.ordered a naval blockade of Cuba.
d.broke off diplomatic relations with Cuba.

12. Victories for the womens movement in the 1970s included all the following
_except_
a. affirmative action.
b. Roe v. Wade.
c. ratification of the equal rights amendment.
d. increased economic and political influence.

13. Nixon’s Vietnam policy included all the following EXCEPT:
a. demands at the Paris peace talks for the withdrawal of Communist forces from
South Vietnam.
b. continued buildup of American ground forces in Vietnam.
c. reduction of domestic unrest over the war.
d. expansion of the air war in Vietnam.

14.The Moral Majority stood for all the following except:
a. outlawing abortions.
b. teaching creationism in the schools.
c. bettering relations with the Soviet Union.
d. allowing prayer in public schools.

15. In the late 1970s, Ronald Reagan had a simple message promoting:
a. racial toleration.
b. a restoration of American pride and prosperity.
c. womens rights.
d. increasing taxes.

16. During the Reagan years, the national debt:
a.decreased slightly because of massive cuts in social programs.
b.stayed the same, despite massive cuts in social programs.
c.nearly tripled.
d.rose by a factor of ten to over $500 million.

Answer: 1. A
2. A
3. D
4. D
5. D
6. C
7. D
8. B
9. B
10. C
11. C
12. A
13. C
14. B
15. B
16. C
Category: History

CONTESTING THE VOTE; A Transcript of Arguments in the Supreme Court Over the Florida Recount

Following is a transcript of the Supreme Court arguments yesterday about the Florida recount, as recorded by the Federal New Services, a private transcription service. The lawyers questioned were Theodore B. Olson, for Gov. George W. Bush; Joseph P. Klock Jr., for the Florida secretary of state, Katherine Harris; Paul F. Hancock, the deputy - Transcript of Supreme Court arguments Dec 1 about Florida recount of presidential vote (L)

Democracy is the best.?

Some people argue that a democracy is not the best form of government because the majority of americans are not informed enough to make judgments.Do u agree? why or why not?

Plz explain in depth...
THNX

Answer: First you have to define which type of democracy you are referring to.

Direct democracy is where each and every citizen can vote on making the laws. Problems with this system is that the average person does not have the time to devote to understanding complex governmental affairs, nor are they necessarily always capable of understanding them and making the best decisions. Aside from that, direct democracy is usually done by simple majority voting, thus there is the potential for tyranny by the majority. If 51% of the people vote to take the other 49%'s property, that is tyranny of the majority.

We have a representative democracy (aka a Republic). Where districts or wards composed of a predetermined number of citizens vote for officials to represent them in the government. It helps with the problems above that I mentioned in direct democracy.

Our government is more complex than simply calling it a representative democracy. We are a federal republic, guided by a constitution. In the beginning it meant we had semi-sovereign states that share power and governmental duties with a national (federal) government. Each state is semi-autonomous and makes most of the laws to govern the people, businesses, and other organizations within its borders. Whereas the national government handles mostly foreign affairs, monetary policy, coining money, the military, immigration, and so on. However, these days the national government is encroaching more and more on the autonomy of the semi-sovereign state governments. All of these rules about what level governs what is set forth in the US Constitution, along our inalienable basic human rights that the government cannot violate.

Furthermore, our levels of government (primarily state and federal) are divided into three branches: the legislative (congress), executive (president/governor), and judicial (state, federal and US Supreme Courts). The legislative writes the laws, the executive signs them into law, and the judiciary makes sure they do not violate the US Constitution or state constitutions.

Just addressing representative democracy: as with any governmental system there are shortcomings and concerns. With ours is that our representatives fail to listen to their constituents and vote for things the majority of voters do not want. Also, without term limits and in regard to US Senators and Congresspersons (not state ones), politicians will stay in office too long and give too much to their constituents, at the expense of the rest of the country in the form of ear marks/pork barreled spending projects (since that is not the proper role of the national government). That part can get complicated, so I'll leave it at that.

Then there is also the problem of the balance between state and national government authority (also known as states' rights). The power has been shifting away from state governments to the federal government since President FDR. The biggest argument against that happening is the inefficiency of the federal gov. and the inability for a federal one-size-fits-all policy to cover a very large and very diverse country like the US. Allowing state and local government more control over the vast majority of issues allows for more efficiency, better representation from politicians, and more say and voting power for the citizens and what kind of government they have.

I forgot to mention another problem with any form of democracy; and that is problems usually take longer to address and come up with solutions for because there needs to be some form of majority (in the US federal government a 2/3's majority is needed in Congress for legislation to be passed onto the president). Whereas in a dictatorship/monarchy or a communist one party rule, there is little to no opposing views, so action happens quicker, of course at the expense of individual liberty, and just because they can act swiftly does not mean they make the best choices nor the most efficient ones. And usually those decisions don't have the peoples' best interests in mind.

Since politicians in a representative democracy are held accountable by the voters, the politicians need to vote more carefully on solutions and policies.

Another unfortunate twist for representative democracy is what you mentioned. And that is the lack of an informed electorate (voters). It's not hard for political pundits, the media, and politicians to misinform and mislead voters to vote a certain way. Most voters are easily persuaded by emotional appeals. For example even though spending per student is at record highs in this country, yet grades and graduation rates are either falling or remaining stagnant, all a politician has to do is bring out a child and spew some misleading statistics and that more funding is needed, and voila, most voters fall for the emotional appeal hook line and sinker. A rational voter will point out that more funding is not the answer, and that history and stats show us more funding does nothing.
Category: Government

Criminal Law Questions I dont understand, of find in text..?

Hello all. Fist semester and in the 8th week. Doing pretty well but there are some questions at the end on each chapter to study on to help w/ the exams. Here are out of 8 chapters (Over 160 Questions) I dont get/understand fully or didnt find in the text. Any help would be great. This is not for an exam, this is some questions from the study guide on each chapter to help me w/ my study guide. Know many of them, and found a lot out of 160 questions. Thought I would give the good ol yahoo community a shot at a few that knows the law. Thanks for any help. Exam is in 2-weeks. Please dont get me wrong these are not exam questions, but chapter questions from the back of the book. "Criminal Law", Ninth Edition, by: Joel Samaha. New to this state and college, and kind of dont know anyone here yet. Trying to meet friends, but most want to party all the time & partying is cool, but my education is more important. Thanks all, never tried yahoo much, so hope to get some good honest answers. Thank you all, will vote for best. 1. The process by which lower courts base their opinions and decisions upon previous opinions and decisions of higher appellate courts is:

a. Habeas Corpus
b. Stare Decisis
c. Corpus Delicti
d. Nunc Pro Tunc

Uncounscious Automatism is an:

a. An element of the mens rea of the crime.
b. Prohibited by the 5th amendment
c. An Affirmative Defense
d. Authorized by the 14th Amendment

In Oklahoma, the element necessary to show criminal possession is:

a. Mere Possession
b. Acquiescence to a crime
c. Dominion & Control
d. Intent to distribute

Intent required in addition to the Actus Reus of the crime is:

a. Evil Intent
b. Specific or General Intent
c. Transferred Intent
d. Strict liability

A constitutionally protected "Right to Privacy" is the basis of the decision in the case of:

a. Miranda v. Arizona
b. Mapp v. Ohio
c. Marbury v. Madison
d. Griswold v. Connecticut

Which 70s-80s era crime fighting drama featured three women crimefighters who never encounter their boss face to face but speak to him through a speakerphone?

The crime of "Failure to Protect" a child from child abuse is an exampile of a crime of what?

A person who knowingly exerts dominion and control over cocain kept in his automobile is in _______________ possession of that cocaine.

The equal protection clause is found in the ____________ Amendment to th U.S. Constitution.

Criminal acts which dont require an intent and require only that the Defendant committed the crime are called __________ ______________ crimes.

A criminal statute using terms which would not be clear to a person of reasonable intellect is unconstitutional under ____________ ______ ____________________.

A law enacted after the criminal incident the law prohibits, is unconstitutional under __________ ______ _______________.

Merely prohibited conduct is known as _____________ __________________.

Inherently evil conduct is known as _______________ ________ ____________.

"Stare Decisis" requires judges to follow prior legislative history.

a. True
b. False

Culpability is bsed up on a notion of blameworthiness and punishment.

a. True
b. False

All material elements of a crime msut be proven by probable cause.

a. True
b. False

Strict Liability crimes require no actus reus.

a. True
b. False

Crimes of omission are based up on failure to perform legal duties.

a. True
b. False

In Oklahoma, mere presence at or acquiescence in a crime without participation does not equal a crime.

a. True
b. False

All of the following are legals of culpaility except:

a. Negligently
b. Recklessly
c. Purposely
d. Uncounscious Automatism

In Powell v. Texas the Court held that:

a. The Texas statute agains public drunkeness was constitutional
b. Mr. Powells addiction to alcohol was punishable.
c. Mr. Powell should not drink before testifying in Court.
d. Mr. Powell should not be allowed a trial de Novo.

In State v. Loge, the defendants conviction was affirmed because:

a. The Court held that knowledge of the open container was not required.
b. The state had proven Mr. Loges mental state at the time of the crime.
c. Mr. Loge was reckless.
d. Minnesota is a good Samaritan State.

According to the Supreme Court, cruel and unusual punishment is a punishment in which:

a. The punishment is instantaneous.
b. The punishment is jail time.
c. The punishment is excessively mutilating to the body.
d. The punishment is community service.

The uncounscious creation of risk by one person upon others is:

a. Carelessness

Im not by any means asking for anyone to do me how work. Just saying out of 160 Questions, here are a few I dont understand & if you would like to help and know the Law great if not no need to be rude. This is not a test question. I would be in class timed, it is a disscussion questions I dont undrstand.
I dont think you are understanding, I do my homework, very hard I must say. I dont want to be a lawyer (LOL), it is a required class to take. Im in my first year. I will pull an A on the exam, just want to know about these questions, (lol), why even respond to a question is it is going to be rude>>?? (thank you for the people that do read the whole article I wrote)..some people...lol.......too funny
its not so much i dont understand them maam its more that I want to get an A in this class, which Im 110% about all the others. I will tell you what I think. my answers are as follows, just want to make sure they are correct, hopefully this will prove to some of the people out there i don know, and have studied hard. d,b,c,a,c,d,b,b,a,c,b,d,a,b,c,d,d,c,t,f,f,t,t,t,t ..running out of room to aswe
the first person that comm. on this said, "Were not here to do your homework; and if we were, odds are we would fail." I dont think so, or I wouldnt have asked you guys. There are very, very smart people out there.
wow, the last two from both of you were awesome!!! now its oing to be hard to choose best 1 (LOL) that way very well put by both of you, and I guess I can now see how somw might think that I wish to cheat and just ask for the answers due to the long question. Im very worried now though !! I have put 8-weeks, really in this dorm room bymyself, because the other guy "Evgeniy" , my roommate dont speak english very much and hangs out with his Russian friends. I have tried to meet people, and set up study groups w/ a few from class, and I was waiting in the lib. for over 2-hrs. for the 4 to show, and guess what..I felt like a complete idiot. No one came, after they promised they would be there. I asked why in a very nice way and all had excuses, or hungover. I have went to my instructor and he was like, "okay I have 60 + students, plus some type of online class, just take notes and read the chapters". Yah.. my money went towards that advise for a instructor. Start over 8-weeks down drain
Thank you writing in so details the both of you two.. just feel like that the other answers were totaly wrong that I posted, and worried other answers may be wrong for the exam. Nice to hear from two people whom seem to care. Thank you..mayby I can find some bleach to drink>>??Grrrrrrrr....
I must first off with a huge thank you!! Wow I’m very blown away with all the trouble you went through to help me out on these questions that are in the back of the chapter. As stated they are not for the exam its self, but to help me personally. Your answer are very in-depth and with your choices and you even went the extra mile to give reason why the answer would be correct. Point blank… you are a very intelligent person. Even after looking at your answers, went back into the book, and sure enough. I found them, just as you stated. You took a very long time in helping me, and so did the other two that was so nice in informining me of there opinions. WOW!!

Answer: I do agree with the other posters, but I am bored and you spent a great deal of time typing so I will answer.

1. The process by which lower courts base their opinion on prior appellate decisions is Stare Decis (latin for "stand the decision") The other answers are all procedural. Habeas Corpus is post-conviction relief for people held improperly. Nunc pro tunc allows lawyers to doctor the books, and back date stuff with the court's permission. Corpus delicti is the total body of evidence of a crime.

2. Unconscious automatism is an affirmative defense. It allows a defendant to be relieved of criminal responsibility for an action over which he/she literally had no control.

3. Dominion and Control is the answer. They are the legal elements of posession. You will cover it when you take property.

4. Intent required, in addition to the act, is specific or general intent. Specific intent correlates to either purposeful actions or knowledgeable actions under the Model Penal Code. General intent covers recklessness and negligence. The other answers are distractors, Transferred intent is a way, in limited circumstances, of establishing Mens Rea for a crime. Strict liability is a small class of crimes for which no intent need be proven, only the action.

5. The right to privacy is found in Mapp v. Ohio, where the Supreme first extended the exclusion doctrine under the 4th amendment to the states. However, the answer you are looking for is Griswold v. Connecticut, since the court essentially erected a right to privacy from the 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 14th amendments.

6. The crime drama with only women who speak to the boss through a microphone is Charlie's Angels.

7. Failure to protect is an omission crime which sets forth an affirmative duty to protect and punishes any failure.

8. Probably Actual and Sole posession since the automobile is probably locked and no one else has access to it. However, if he were at work, not in in close proximity it would be Contructive and Sole posession of it.

9. The infamous equal protection clause is in the 14th amendment, right after the Due process clause.

10. Crimes for which intent need not be proven are called strict liability crimes, or in older terms Absolute liability crimes.

11. A criminal statute not clear to a person of reasonable intellect is a violation of the Vagueness doctrine requiring that people be on notice of what conduct constitutes a crime. Based on the fill in the blank spaces the actual term you want is the Due Process clause. For more info look up procedural due process as opposed to substantive due process.

12. A law retroactively making conduct illegal is invalid under the ex post facto clause. (Latin for "after the fact")

13. Conduct that is evil only because it is prohibited is Malum prohibitum (latin for evil because of prohibition).

14. Conduct that is evil by nature is Malum in se. (Latin for evil by its very existence. A related latin phrase you will become familiar with is Per se.)

15. Stare Decis does NOT require that judges follow legislative history, only prior judicial decisions.

16. Culpability IS based on blameworthyness.

17. Trick question. You must answer false. All material elements must be proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT rather than mere probable cause or preponderance.

18. False, the only thing which strict liability crimes do require is the actus reus. What you don't need is mens rea.

19. True, omission is the failure to act upon a legally imposed duty.

20. Mere presence can never be a crime. There is no action, just passive presence. Moreover there is no mens rea, only apathy.

21. D. automtism is an affirmative defense which attacks the voluntariness of the actus reus. It is NOT a level of culpabilty. It essentially says "yes the action happened, yes my body did it, but it was unconsious and I didn't choose to do the act." Hence no voluntary bad act. The other answers are levels of mens rea, or criminal intent under the Model Penal Code.

22. A. Powell v. Texas held the statute constitutional. The other two answers are distractors, but B is the WRONG answer. Squarely and on the merits opposed to the holding of both Powell v. Texas and Robinson v. California. These cases are usually discussed to show the prohibition against criminalizing status. In Powell the court held that unlike Robinson (whose sole crime was being addicted to drugs) the Texas statute punished the act of being in public (while drunk) rather than the status (of being drunk).

23. State v. Loge was not covered in my law school classes. I had to go look it up. However, the answer is A. The case discussed strict liability, and held that the crime in question was such a strict liability crime.

24. I need more context for this question.

25. This question got cut off. Email me and I will be happy to help.
wal10973@suffolk.edu

6.
Category: Law & Ethics

Supreme Court strikes down part of Voting Rights Act - Legal Forum ...

4 hours ago ... The Supreme Court ruled a key portion of the Voting Rights Act ... waiting outside the Supreme Court in Washington as key decisions are ...

A Guide to The Times's Supreme Court Coverage - NYTimes.com

This week is expected to be one of the more consequential ones at the Supreme Court in recent years, with decisions coming on cases concerning same-sex marriage, affirmative action and the Voting Rights Act.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Section of Voting Rights Act as ...

5 hours ago ... In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act as unconstitutional. The law requires nine mostly-Southern ...

CONTESTING THE VOTE; Text of Supreme Court Ruling on Bush v. Gore Florida Recount Case

Following is the text of the Supreme Courts decision last night that there could be no further counting of Floridas disputed presidential ballot. The vote in Bush v. Gore was 5 to 4. It is not clear who wrote the majority opinion, but Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote a concurring opinion in which Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence - Text of US Supreme Courts decision that there can be not further counting of Floridas disputed presidential ballots; majority opinion is unsigned; text of concurring opinion written by Chief Justice William H Rehnquist and joined by Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas; texts of four dissenting opinions issued jointly or separately by Justices John Paul Stevens, David H Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G Breyer; photos (L)

CONTESTING THE VOTE; The Florida Supreme Courts Decision on Hand Recounts of Ballots

Following is the ruling yesterday by the Florida Supreme Court ordering a recount in the states presidential election. The vote in Gore vs. Harris was 4 to 3. Justices Harry Lee Anstead, Barbara J. Pariente, R. Fred Lewis and Peggy A. Quince concurred in the majority opinion; Chief Justice Charles T. Wells and Justice Major B. Harding wrote - Text of decision by Florida Supreme Court ordering recount of presidential ballots; photos (L)

what is a communist? Cuban?

cuba

Answer: The Republic of Cuba is constitutionally defined as a "socialist state guided by the principles of José Martí, and the political ideas of Marx, Engels and Lenin". The present constitution also ascribes the role of the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC) to be the "leading force of society and of the state". The first secretary of the Communist Party, Fidel Castro, is concurrently President of the Council of State (President of Cuba) and President of the Council of Ministers (sometimes referred to as Prime Minister of Cuba).[7] Members of both councils are chosen by the National Assembly of People’s Power. The President of Cuba serves for a five-year term and there is no limit to the number of terms of office. Castro has been President since the adoption of the current Constitution in 1976 when he replaced Osvaldo Dorticós Torrado. The Supreme Court of Cuba serves as the nation's highest judicial branch of government. It is also the court of last resort for all appeals from convictions in provincial courts.
Cuba's national legislature, the National Assembly of People's Power (Asamblea Nacional de Poder Popular), has 609 members who serve five-year terms. Candidates for the Assembly are approved by public referendum. All Cuban citizens over sixteen years of age who have not been found guilty of a criminal offense can "vote." Article 131 of the Constitution states that voting shall be "through free, equal and secret vote". Article 136 states: "In order for deputies or delegates to be considered elected they must get more than half the number of valid votes cast in the electoral districts". Votes are cast by secret ballot and are counted in public view. Individual vote totals, which are invariably high, are not verified by non-partisan, independent, or non-state organs and observers. Nominees are chosen at local gatherings from multiple candidates before gaining approval from election committees. In the subsequent election, there is just one candidate for each seat, who must gain a majority to be elected.
No political party is permitted to nominate candidates or campaign on the island, though the Communist Party of Cuba has held five party congress meetings since 1975. In 1997, the party claimed 780,000 members, and representatives generally constitute at least half of the Councils of state and the National Assembly. The remaining positions are filled by candidates without party affiliation. Other political parties campaign and raise finances internationally, whilst activity within Cuba by oppositional groups is minimal and mostly illegal. While the Cuban constitution has language pertaining to freedom of speech, rights are limited by Article 62, which states that "None of the freedoms which are recognized for citizens can be exercised contrary to... the existence and objectives of the socialist state, or contrary to the decision of the Cuban people to build socialism and communism. Violations of this principle can be punished by law". Almost all adult Cubans participate in the community-based Committees for the Defense of the Revolution, which play a central role in daily life. These groups are designed to coordinate public projects, protect and ensure socialist ideology among the citizenry, and act as a neighbourhood watchdog against "counter-revolutionary" activity.
Since Cuba became a declared socialist republic in 1961, the United States Government has initiated various policy measures against Cuba which have had a considerable political and economic effect on the island; these have variously been designed to remove the leadership and to encourage Cuba to undertake political change towards a multi-party electoral process. The most significant of these measures is the United States embargo against Cuba and the subsequent Helms-Burton Act of 1996. Many believe that the Cuban government does not meet the minimal standards of a democracy, especially through its lack of multi-party contests for seats. The Cuban government, its supporters and other observers within and outside Cuba argue that Cuba has a form of democracy, citing the extensive participation in the nomination process at the national and municipal level.

Communism is an ideology that seeks to establish a classless, stateless social organization, based upon common ownership of the means of production. It can be classified as a branch of the broader socialist movement. Early forms of human social organization have been described as 'primitive communism' by Marxists. However, communism as a political goal is generally a conjectured form of future social organization. There is a considerable variety of views among self-identified communists, including Maoism, Trotskyism, council communism, Luxemburgism, anarchist communism, Christian communism, and various currents of left communism, which are generally the more widespread varieties. However, various offshoots of the Soviet (what critics call the 'Stalinist') and Maoist interpretations of Marxism-Leninism comprise a particular branch of communism that has the distinction of having been the primary driving force for communism in world politics during most of the 20th century. The competing branch of Trotskyism has not had such a distinction.
Karl Marx held that society could not be transformed from the capitalist mode of production to the advanced communist mode of production all at once, but required a transitional period which Marx described as the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat, the first stage of communism. The communist society Marx envisioned emerging from capitalism has never been implemented, and it remains theoretical; Marx, in fact, commented very little on what communist society would actually look like. However, the term 'Communism', especially when it is capitalized, is often used to refer to the political and economic regimes under communist parties that claimed to embody the dictatorship of the proletariat.
In the late 19th century, Marxist theories motivated socialist parties across Europe, although their policies later developed along the lines of "reforming" capitalism, rather than overthrowing it. The exception was the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party. One branch of this party, commonly known as the Bolsheviks and headed by Vladimir Lenin, succeeded in taking control of the country after the toppling of the Provisional Government in the Russian Revolution of 1917. In 1918, this party changed its name to the Communist Party, thus establishing the contemporary distinction between communism and other trends of socialism.
After the success of the October Revolution in Russia, many socialist parties in other countries became communist parties, signaling varying degrees of allegiance to the new Communist Party of the Soviet Union. After World War II, Communists consolidated power in Eastern Europe, and in 1949, the Communist Party of China (CPC) led by Mao Zedong established the People's Republic of China, which would later follow its own unique ideological path of communist development. Among the other countries in the Third World that adopted a pro-communist government at some point were Cuba, North Korea, North Vietnam, Laos, Angola, and Mozambique. By the early 1980s almost one-third of the world's population lived in Communist states.
Since the early 1970s, the term "Eurocommunism" was used to refer to the policies of communist parties in western Europe, which sought to break with the tradition of uncritical and unconditional support of the Soviet Union. Such parties were politically active and electorally significant in France and Italy.
There is a history of anti-communism in the United States, which manifested itself in the Sedition Act of 1918 and in the subsequent Palmer Raids, for example, as well as in the later period of McCarthyism. However, many regions of Latin America continue to have strong communist movements of various types.
With the decline of the Communist governments in Eastern Europe from the late 1980s and the breakup of the Soviet Union on December 8, 1991, communism's influence has decreased dramatically in Europe. However, around a quarter of the world's population still lives in Communist states, mostly in the People's Republic of China.
Category: Government

Three Mondays in June

A Guide to the Supreme Court Decision on the Voting Rights Act : Videos

The Supreme Court on the 1965 Voting Rights Act ...

Due Process: Voting Rights Act Decision (Aired 7 ...

Due Process: Voting Rights Act Decision (Aired 7 ...

Supreme Court Rulings Loom On Affirmative Action ...

Watch Attorney General Eric Holder's Remarks on ...

Los Angeles news Supreme Court Hears Voting ...

The "Citizens United" for Voting Rights? Civil ...

A Racial Entitlement? Supreme Court Threatens ...

Supreme Court overturns Voting Rights Act ...

Save Dr. King's Dream Act - Supreme Court to ...

Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Voting Rights ...

Supreme Court bingo hints at upcoming decisions ...

Supreme Court DECISION. Voting Rights: Section ...

Voting Rights Act Takes Hit by Supreme Court - 6 ...

Supreme Court Deals Blow to Voting Rights Act ...

Civil Rights Leader Rep. Lewis Blasts Supreme ...

Holder: 'Deeply disappointed' in ruling on voting ...

Supreme Court Decisions 2013: Voting Rights, Gay ...

High Court Poised For A Month Of High -Stakes ...

Voices of the New Generation: Keep the Voting ...

Supreme Court Decisions 2013 Voting Rights, Gay ...

Civil Rights Leader Blasts Supreme Court Voting ...

Supreme Court OVERTURNS Voting Rights ...

SUPREME Court Decisions 2013 Voting Rights ...

A Guide to the Supreme Court Decision on the Voting Rights Act : Photo Gallery

Everything you need to know about the Supreme Court Voting Rights ...

Everything you need to know about the Supreme Court Voting Rights ...

Supreme Court: The Voting Rights Act Worked—So Now It's ...

The Best Lines From Ginsburg's Dissent on the Voting Rights Act ...

Supreme Court Rulings This June: Everything You Need to Know - The ...

Why the Supreme Court May Rule Against the Voting Rights Act ...

After 50 Years, the Voting Rights Act's Biggest Threat: The ...

How a Supreme Court Defeat Could Save Voting Rights - Kiran ...

voting-rights_200.jpg

Supreme Court Likely to Strike Down the Voting Rights Act's ...

OB-DJ649_0327vo_F_ ...

Supreme Court stops use of key part of Voting Rights Act - The ...

Update: Supreme Court Will Put Voting Rights Act on Trial ...

A guide: Major rulings coming out of the Supreme Court | The Daily ...

Washington: Supreme Court strikes down key provision of Voting ...

Washington: Supreme Court strikes down key provision of Voting ...

[Uhuru Kenyatta]: Presidential Inauguration Speech [9 April 2013]

Henry McNeal Turner

Henry McNeal Turner

Henry McNeal Turner

Henry McNeal Turner

OBAMAS MARXIST ADMINISTRATION ON DISPLAY FOR ALL TO SEE

John B. & Isabella Leech House

John B. & Isabella Leech House

The Making of Indian Foreign Policy : The Role of Scholarship and Public Opinion By Mr. C. Raja Mohan

The Words of Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr.

John B. & Isabella Leech House

John B. & Isabella Leech House

John B. & Isabella Leech House

John B. & Isabella Leech House

John B. & Isabella Leech House

A GUIDE TO THE SUPREME COURT DECISION ON THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT

A Guide to The Times's Supreme Court Coverage

The right move on affirmative action

High court strikes down part of 1965 Voting Rights Act

High court voids key part of Voting Rights Act but puts off rulings on gay ...

Everything You Need To Know About The Marriage Equality Cases At The ...

A summary of major upcoming Supreme Court decisions

Pakistani premier says government plans to put former military ruler on trial ...

Border Security Amendment To Immigration Bill Clears Major Hurdle

As Social Media Swirl Around It, Supreme Court Sticks to Its Analog Ways

Slatest PM: One Down, Two to Go For SCOTUS

How to Wait for the Big Supreme Court Decisions Like a Pro