May 2010 Archives

Phyllis' Weekly Challenge:Obama STARTS to Disarm America

By Glyn Wright on May 29, 2010 5:59 PM | No TrackBacks

Use Phyllis' article, Obama STARTS to Disarm America, to discuss the following questions.  

 

1. Why do countries develop nuclear weapons?

 

2. According to the U.S. Constitution, what responsibility is explicitly given to the federal government that justifies developing and maintaining nuclear warheads?

 

3. Why would Russia prefer that the United States destroy some of its nuclear warheads (disarmament)? What advantage does Russia have in setting the limit of nuclear warheads higher than the number it currently has? 

 

4. What is the logic behind "equal ceilings" limit on how many nuclear warheads a country can own?

 

5. What kind of example does President Obama hope to set by reducing the number of nuclear warheads to equal the amount owned by Russia? Why might other countries (especially smaller countries) be disinclined to follow our example?

 

6. Do you think that other countries decide how many nuclear warheads to build based upon the number of nuclear weapons in the United States? Is a "world without  nuclear weapons," as Obama envisions, possible? 

 

7. How would the New START Treaty affect the United States militarily in respect to other nations?

 

8. What were the international effects of the United States' and Russia's post-Cold War nuclear reductions? Did they accomplish their objective through this reduction?

 

9. How does the New START treaty apply to  those nations whose possession of nuclear arms could threaten other nations? (For example, rogue nations or terrorists.)

 

10. According to Article 2, Section II of the Constitution, what checks and balances are placed upon the creation of treaties? 

  

Bonus questions:

Is there ever a time when legal control of nuclear arms or weapons is the best strategy? Are they effective?

 

Research articles on Russia's nuclear arms positions during the Cold War and today, comparing them to the United States' during that same time period. Look for direct quotes, government statements and policies, etc. Compare objectives.

 

Challenge:

Find an online news article discussing the STARTS treaty. Post your comments on the topic to the online news site.

 

Join the Teen Eagles Fan Page. Post a comment explaining how you would vote on the START Treaty if you were a U.S. Senator.

 

 

 

 

Bookmark and Share

Phyllis' Weekly Challenge: How Republicans Can Blow the Coming Election

By Glyn Wright on May 20, 2010 3:10 PM | No TrackBacks

Use Phyllis' column, How Republicans Can Blow the Coming Election to answer the following questions.

1. What are some of the arguments for and against allowing Mexican truck drivers on U.S. highways? 
 
2. How could allowing Mexican truck drivers on U.S. highways affect our concept of borders?
 
3. How might American drivers be affected by the presence of Mexican trucks? (See also http://www.truckinginfo.com/news/news-detail.asp?news_id=70054&news_category_id=3 )
 
4. The NAFTA superhighway is part of a project started by a Spanish company, Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, S.A., which has bought the right to operate a tollroad through Texas and collect tolls for the next 50 years (the Trans-Texas Corridor). Is there a connection between allowing Mexican Truck drivers into the U.S. and building a highway that connects Mexico, the U.S., and Canada? 
 
 
5. What would be the positive and/or negative economic effects of building a superhighway?
 
6. What would be the positive and negative affects of a superhighway on American national sovereignty? Knowing these affects, is a superhighway something we should continue to consider?
 
7. Building new highways requires the taking land from private property owners. Does the U.S. Consitution give government the authority to take private property? Under what conditions? (See Amendment V). What is the term used to describe this government action?
 
8. Who should decide what is a "just" amount of compensation?
 
9. What ethical issues might eminent domain bring when considering the taking of private property to build a superhighway for the purpose of moving goods from southern Mexico up through Canada?
 
10. Why do you think that Phyllis Schlafly suggests that Republicans take a hard stance against allowing Mexican trucks and building a superhighway? How does eminent domain relate to allowing or banning Mexican truck drivers on U.S. highways?
 
Challenge:
1. Find one related article concerning this discussion and post to your social profile(s).
 
2. Look up the 2005 Kelo Case concerning eminent domain. Discuss it with your family. How did the Kelo ruling change the way local governments can use eminent domain? What do you think were the original intentions Amendment V?
 
Bonus:
 
When is eminent domain reasonable?
Bookmark and Share

Phyllis' Weekly Challenge: Obama Steers the Court Far Left

By Glyn Wright on May 12, 2010 8:37 PM | No TrackBacks

Read Phyllis Schlafly's colum, Obama Steers the Court Far Left and discuss the following questions.

 

1. What qualifications does the U.S. Constitution give for appointing judges to the Supreme Court? See Article III.

 

2. Phyllis Schlafly defines a "supremacist" as "one who believes in or advocates the supremacy of a particular group--judges--over the lawful wishes of the people." (The Supremacists, x). Are there signs that Ms. Kagan would advocate a particular interest? Which ones?

 

Link to book: http://www.eagleforum.org/groups/index.html#supremacists

 

3. Does it matter if someone has no experience as a judge to sit on the highest court that reviews the decisions of other judges? What might be the results of confirming an inexperienced judge?

 

4. Should Ms. Kagan's age be a factor in the nomination process?

 

5. Some see Ms. Kagan's nomination as not worth fighting against because she would replace Justice Stevens, who has a record of giving liberal rulings. In other words, the "balance" of the court would not change because Ms. Kagan is likely to vote like Justice Stevens has in the past.  Could Ms. Kagan's confirmation fundamentally change the direction of our nation? Why or why not?

 

6. What are the repercussions for confirming a person with a known anti-military bias?

 

7. Do you think it is important to have at least one judge on the court with military experience? Why?

 

8. Beyond political beliefs, does one's personal life choices and decisions affect how he or she views, interprets, and judges the world around them? How?

 

9. What are the implications of confirming a person who chooses to participate in sexually immoral acts like a homosexual relationship?

 

10. Justice Kennedy pointed to foreign laws for reasons to overturn Texas sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas (2003). [link:http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZO.html] Are there any implications that Ms. Kagan would look for foreign laws to justify possible biases she has?

 

11. Do you support the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court of the United States? Why or why not?

 

Challenge:

1. Sign the Students for Life petition opposing Elena Kagan: www.iopposekagan.

2. Post the link to the petition along with Phyllis' column to your social networking profile

 

Kentucky Supreme Court Justice, in the 1993 state case of Kentucky v. Wasson: "It is foolish and fruitless to ignore morality in our society and in our governmental function. Every political decision of consequence reflects a moral judgment."

 

Bookmark and Share

Phyllis' Weekly Challenge: Why Tea Partiers say Throw the Bums Out

By Glyn Wright on May 7, 2010 2:42 PM | No TrackBacks

Use Phyllis' Column: Why Tea Partiers Say Throw the Bums Out to discuss the following questions.

1. What is your initial reaction to Puerto Rico becoming a state? 

 

2. Have you discussed this issue in your school classroom? What is the response from your peers?

 

3. What are some reasons why Puerto Rico consistently votes against statehood? 

 

4. What reasons are giving for grantingranting Puerto Rico statehood? What are reasons against granting Puerto Rico statehood? 

 

5. Should Americans speak and understand a common language? Why or why not?

 

6. Why would Puerto Rican officials support Puerto Rico jjoining the Union?

 

7. Discuss the economic results of admitting Puerto Rico to the Union.

 

8. What reasons might Puerto Rican members of Congress not support H.R. 2499?

 

9. Why might democrats overwhelmingly approve of making Puerto Rico a state?

 

10. Discuss American sovereignty. What does this phrase mean to you?

 

Action:

 

H.R. 2499 passed the U.S. House. It will now go to the Senate for a vote. Contact your Senators to share your view on this bill.

 

Post a legislative alert on one of the social networks you below to about HR 2499. 

 

Bookmark and Share
« April 2010 | Main Index | Archives | June 2010 »