Voter Fraud Fix or Poll Tax?

Does requiring a photo ID to vote reduce voter fraud or give legal protection to an institutional poll tax? Compelling arguments can, and were made, on both sides of this constitutional question, but in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled Monday that Indiana's ID law requiring prospective voters to present a photo ID before casting a ballot does not disenfranchise.

This case is a good example of how Supreme Court decisions often are political. It also give us working definitions of voter fraud, election fraud and as disenting justice Stephen Breyer said a new use of the previously overturned poll taxes.

Many of you worked at the polls this spring. Should Illinois have an ID requirement to vote?

Read the attatched article and listen to the audio. Also think about linkage organizations the the two political parties and their uses different means to get there special interest accomplished. In this lawsuit, the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) used litagation to challenge the Indiana law, and though it was granted a writ of certiori (and was asmong the 1% of cases the high court hears) it lost out. Now using democratic interest groups and the media they are trying to make the case to the public the poor and elderly are being denied the right to vote in Indiana.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0429/p03s09-usju.html

More practice FRQ Q & A

At his website, http://studyingcomparative.blogspot.com/ , Ken Wedding continues his list of FRQ, in which he is giving pencils and feedback on submitted answers, here is a list of some of he Q & A:

Question 6 was: Since independence, the distribution of oil revenues has been one of the most contentious issues in Nigerian politics. Identify two factors that make the issue contentious and explain why those factors impede resolution of the conflicts.

Anonymous 2's answer is:

"6. The distribution of oil revenues in Nigeria has been a particularly contentious issue because oil is Nigeria’s largest source of revenue. It has also been a source of foreign investment and multinational corporate presence which has integrated Nicaragua into the world market as a marginalized and vulnerable power. Both these factors have contributed to Nigeria’s dependence on the volatile oil market for income.

"The oil revenues themselves are distributed very unevenly, often falling into the pockets of politicians instead of being spent on the public welfare.

"Prebendalist values have only been further entrenched and practiced in Nigerian society due to loose or nonexistent oil revenue distribution policy. Corporations have been accused of disproportionately low wages for workers, and the abuse of human rights. Nigeria’s dependence on oil and the foreign presence that it has brought to the country makes the distribution of these lucrative and essential profits a largely controversial topic. The well-established prebendalist values and the lack of coherent or stable policies regarding the official distribution of these finances only impedes the path to resolving this conflict."

Ken Wedding says:

This is a four point question. One point for each of two factors causing contention over the distribution of oil revenues and one point for each of two reasons those factors impede the resolution of the contentious issues.

Causes of contention include :

• geographic location of oil and gas fields


• income and wealth disparities between regions of the country


• governments' reliance on oil revenues for more than 75% of of their revenues
  competition among states for revenue


• large-scale coincidence of ethnic group (nations) boundaries with state boundaries
  prebendalism


• corruption and lack of transparency in distribution of revenues

The reasons must logically and accurately explain why each cause makes resolution difficult (coincidence of ethnic and state boundaries) or impossible (geographic distribution of oil fields).

Anonymous 2's answer earns a point for the statement that "oil is Nigeria’s largest source of revenue..." The rest of the paragraph is not relevant to the question.

The answer earns a second point for the statement in the second paragraph that revenues regularly end up in "the pockets of politicians..."

Next, the rubric requires that the answer explain why those causes of contention impede resolution of the conflicts.

What reasoning does Anonymous 2 offer for why the reliance on oil revenues and corruption make conflict resolution difficult or impossible?

The third paragraph mentions prebendalism, the lack of revenue distribution policies, and the policies of corporations, but neither of the causes identified in the first two paragraphs.

NOTE: This is one of those times when paraphrasing the question as an introduction to an answer might have helped. What if the first paragraph began with the sentence, "Two factors that make the issue of distributing oil revenues contentious are..." and the last paragraph began, "Those factors impede resolution of the conflicts because..."? Starting the paragraphs that way reminds you of exactly what you're supposed to write about and keeps you focused on responding to the question and not getting lost in other ideas that come to mind.

This answer earns two of four possible points. Anonymous 2 does, however, win a pair of WYNTK pencils. BTW, the answer was numbered. It's always a good idea to number your answers.
_______________________

Question 13 was:What are two reasons it's useful to comparative political scientists to distinguish between regime and government?

Will's answer is:

"The study of comparative government makes a distinction between regime- the underlying structure, written or unwritten constitution, etc. of a state- and government- the person, group, or party that exerts control over that state. There are several important reasons for this distinction.

1. A government and its rule may often be largely different from the underlying regime because they do not follow the ideals laid out in the country's constitution. For example, the government in Russia is as important a topic as the regime because Putin and United Russia have exerted powers that extend beyond those laid out in Russia's constitution, and the elections in Russia may be largely fixed."

2. A state can change its government without changing regime. Tony Blair's idea of what role the government should play in the United Kingdom and Margaret Thatcher's idea of the same are two very different things. However, when the Labour Party took control of Parliament in the UK, the underlying regime of the country did not change."

Ken Wedding says:

This would be a two-point question.

A vital task for political scientists, like any other scientists, is to precisely define the topics they study. Basic definitions, like regime and government are among the most important for political scientists. Why? Because if you're trying to make generalizations, find correlations and causations, or make predictions about political systems, you need to be as precise as possible or you might be trying to find similarities in groups of unalike things, describing causations when you're looking at correlations, and making faulty predictions.

As Will's response indicates, regime describes structure and process of governance. Government identifies the people and groups that have public authority.

Here are the reasons in my rubric for distinguishing between regime and government.

• A regime is relatively stable while government may change frequently therefore variables are more likely to found in government


• Regime is usually an expression of cultural values; actions of government can confirm or contradict the validity of those expressed values


• Governments can be evaluated by how "faithful" they are to the goals, institutions, and processes defined by the regime


• Governments and political actors can be compared over time to their predecessors operating within the same regime


• Changes in government can bring about significant changes in laws and policies without changing the regime allowing comparative case studies to be made within a regime

Will's response earns two points. His first reason matches my rubric's second point. His second reason would fit within my last point.

Will's introduction, which includes basic definitions of regime and government, is probably more elaborate than necessary. If you have time to do that much, it's not a problem.

However, his statement that "There are several important reasons for this distinction." is an important element to his answer. Since both elements asked for by the question fall into the same category, the exam rubric might not require an identifying label like that, but it might.The numbering of his two reasons is a nice touch. It helps the exam reader recognize the important elements of the answer.

________________

Question 7 was: What is one economic change instigated by the Thatcher or Major governments that was continued by the Blair government and why was it continued?

What is one economic change instigated by the Thatcher or Major governments that was reversed or changed in a major way by the Blair government and why was it reversed or changed?

Anonymous 2's answer is:

"Margaret Thatcher’s programs of neoliberalism were continued by the Blair administration because by promoting competition among businesses without significant government intervention, and by attracting foreign investment, considerable economic growth and stability was achieved. Thatcher’s policies of traditional monetarism, on the other hand, were significantly changed when the New Labuor Party came into power. Monetarism was characterized by reducing social expenditure and privatizing or decreasing the work force of the public sector. Blair increased spending on social policies instead of cutting taxes such as the National Health Service. This change was made because New Labour was a more liberal party than Thatcher that stressed social policy and believed that the government had a more immediate responsibility to provide public services than to decrease taxes."

Ken Wedding says:

This is a four point question. One point is earned for the identification of an economic policy begun by either Thatcher or Major and largely continued by Blair. One point is earned for the identification of an economic policy begun by either Thatcher or Major and significantly changed by Blair.

Two more points can be earned by accurately and logically explaining a motive for each of the policy choices by Blair.

My rubric describes economic policies that Blair essentially continued as:

• giving more monetary policy independence to the Bank of England

• privatizations of formerly public businesses

• reduction of the power of trade unions

• sale of public housing to residents

• resisting monetary union with the EU

Thatcher/Major policies that were reversed or essentially changed by Blair include:

• Thatcher/Major's reduction of taxes

• Thatcher/Major's reduction of government spending (especially in health and education)

• Blair's introduction of a minimum wage

• Blair/Brown's increases in social security (welfare) spending

Anonymous 2's answer to this question identifies Thatcher's general economic policy direction as "neoliberalism" which is correct, but is not a specific policy identification. The supply-side concept of reducing government regulation, described in the answer, played a minor role in Thatcher and Major's economic policies.

Monetarism is defined as "characterized by reducing social expenditure and privatizing or decreasing the work force of the public sector." In fact, monetarism refers to manipulation of money supply and interest rates, which Thatcher did early in her government to control inflation.

The answer argues that Blair continued the policies of "neoliberalism" and "monetarism" because by "promoting competition among businesses... and by attracting foreign investment, considerable economic growth and stability was achieved." Major's government oversaw a rather nationalistic economic policy that discouraged foreign investment and by the end of Major's government, the economy was in trouble. That was a significant reason for Blair's election.

Anonymous 2's answer earns a point for correctly noting that, "Blair increased spending on social policies instead of cutting taxes..."

The answer also asserts that, "This change was made because New Labour was a more liberal party than Thatcher that stressed social policy and believed that the government had a more immediate responsibility to provide public services than to decrease taxes."

The problem with this assertion is the ambiguity of the term "liberal." The Economist, a British publication, might well describe Thatcher's policies as more liberal (in a classical and British sense). The use of a different term, populist, for instance, might have made a difference.

And a second point could have been earned by explaining that inflation, increased costs, and slowly increasing government expenditures on medical care and schools had created widely accepted perceptions of declining quality in both areas.

This essay earns 1 point.

If you're asked a question like this, be very careful how you describe the policy positions you discuss. Be as specific as you can. And keep your explanations as closely tied to the examples as possible.

Aren’t They All Critical Elections?

(From CBS2School)

Calling critical elections merely important is a grand understatement. Here again students of government must learn the special vocabulary of politics. Critical elections are much more than just significant.

Learn more about critical elections.

Critical elections involve a realignment of voters. When a long-standing loyal group of voters switch their allegiance from one party to another we call that a realignment. When these realignments occur, political scientists call it a critical election.

It is does not happen often.

1860, 1896 and 1932 are three presidential elections in our history which have been labeled critical. In each, a realignment of voters took place. The most important was 1932. In that election, Franklin Roosevelt was able to build his New Deal coalition. The Democratic party would dominate Washington for years to come.

The Democratic grip on Washington, particularly Congress, was not broken until 1994. In 1994 Republicans regained the majority leadership in Congress. No significant realignment, however, took place. 1994 saw, at best, a dealignment. Although some Democrats in that year abandoned their loyalty, it was not permanent.

Why has it been so long since we have seen a critical election?

Could it be because so many voters now call themselves independents? It is difficult to have a realignment when so many are not aligned at all.

Some are imagining that 2008 could be another critical election. There is some thought that Barack Obama could attract a permanent group of young voters, often outside of the process, to join his movement. If he can, there will be a lot of history made next November.

All elections appear to be critical. Only a few deserve the label.

__________________________

Critical elections in the United States typically have occurred:

A. as a result of a temporary shift in the popular coalition supporting one or both parties

B. whenever a third party has secured more than fifteen percent of the presidential vote C. each time a Republican has been elected President

D. when voter turnout has declined significantly from the previous election

E. when groups of voters have changed their traditional patterns of party loyalties

Pied Pipers

Following the lead of Garrett, who pied me for a good cause on Friday, New York Times columist Thomas Friedman was attacked with pies in the face by environmental activists during a speech about energy at Brown Univeristy.

The author of The World is Flat, which many of you read last summer, was making remarks that responding to climate change will make America "stronger, more innovative, [and] more energy secure." He was greeted by protesters and a shamrock-colored whipped cream pie.

The Providence Journal (by way of Huffington Post.com reports):

Not everyone agrees with Friedman's vision that innovation is the path to climate and energy salvation. Just seconds into his speech, he was interrupted by two environmental activists, who stormed the stage shortly after Friedman stepped up to the microphone, tossing two paper plates loaded with shamrock-colored whipped cream at him.

Friedman ducked, and was left with only minor streams of the sugary green goo on his black pants and turtleneck.

He stood in bewilderment and mild disgust as the young man and woman bolted from the stage and out the side door, throwing a handful of fliers into the air to relay the message they apparently were not going to deliver personally.

"Thomas Friedman deserves a pie in the face...," the flier said, "because of his sickeningly cheery applaud for free market capitalism's conquest of the planet, for telling the world that the free market and techno fixes can save us from climate change. From carbon trading to biofuels, these distractions are dangerous in and of themselves, while encouraging inaction with respect to the true problems at hand..."

Here's story of Friedman pied:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/24/thomas-friedman-pie-in-th_n_98367.html

And as long-time Cubs announcer Jack Brickhouse used to say, "Watch it, now!" here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/24/thomas-friedman-pie-in-th_n_98367.html

______________

So that you don't get pied in the face by the AP Government tests on May 5, remember we begin in-class reviews on Monday (US: Foundations; Comp: GB). We will have after-school reviews on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday (before school). Practice tests (5 pts. ec for each) will be given Monday, Wednesday and Thursday at 6 p.m. and Friday after school.

Keys from Keystone State and Beyond?

So last night, Hillary Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary 55% to 45% over Barack Obama (CNN has the delegate count, 81-69). Two weeks until the Indiana and North Carolina contests, like the buggy in Pennsylvania Amish country, is this the primary camapaign that time just cannot rush?

What does it all mean. Blog your thoughts and projections of when the Democrats will have a nominee for president (presumtive, or otherwise) after you read some interesting posts linked here:

First, CNN has exit poll data. What'dya make of it?

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/#PADEM

Second, The Swamp has an interesting article on Obama's apparent white working class problem.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/obamas_white_workingclass_prob.html

Dan Balz onf the Washington Post, had 8 preview questions prior to Tuesday's Penn Primary. What answers do we have today?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/21/AR2008042102805.html?hpid=topnews

And finally, CNN political comentator Jack Cafferty asks, "Why can't Obama close the deal?"

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/23/why-cant-barack-obama-close-the-deal/

Bank (Power of) One

Name: Ivonne Soincilier

Location: Trou-du-Nord , Haiti

Activity: Home Products Sales

Loan Amount: $1,200.00

Loan Use: Purchase soaps and wax in bulk as well as materials for constructing a business stand

Repayment Term: 6 - 10 months

In addition to AIDS, civil war and drought, many African nations find themselves tightly ensared in the debt trap.Like many developing countries, most nations in sub-saharan Africa have become thoroughly dependent on foreign loans for more than a generation.

A traditional story is that, after decolonization, many developing countries turned to the International Monetary Fund for the capital financing so crucial in economic development. The IMF tended to loan money to the most desperately poor countries on condition that they reduce government spending and open their markets to foreign trade.

But in many cases, whether because of corruption or political instability, these nations fell behind in repayments and ended up in the scenario of relying almost soley on loans and foreign aid just to repay the initial loans. In some cases debt and foreign aid comprised 100% of GDP in these countries.

Now, thanks to the internet, we can give more loans to help foster economic development in these countries.Instead of huge banks lending to poor governments, websites like www.kiva.org encourage you--the banker--to lend small amounts of money (as little as $25) directly to local entrepenuers.

These microloans help to finance everything from a one-woman peanut butter shop in Uganda to tiny dairy farms in Azerbaijan. With liasons on the ground in these developing countries, Kiva allows citizen-bankers to personally select loan recipients and sees that 100% of this much needed capital is delivered in as little as two days.

Over the duration of the loan (up to one year) you can recieve email updates about the status of the business that you helped to fund.And before you start to think that these are just charitable donations, keep in mind that through Kiva’s system 100% of these loans have been repaid on time.

In the battles about whether Globalization of free-market forces leads to more dependency in developing economies, the principles of microfinancing might be the best place to build a common understanding of how to start making a difference $25 at a time.

Media Quickly Becoming Youdia

(From CBS2School)

Elections alone do not make a democracy.

Healthy democracies do feature free and fair elections, but democratic systems must also operate with a degree of transparency. Thus, citizens must be allowed to examine how government works to in order to hold government officials truly accountable.

The Framers of our Constitution understood this and knew the free press would be vital to help citizens stay educated. It’s no surprise that this protection was guaranteed in the very first amendment to the Constitution just as it’s no surprise that the media is deemed to be important enough to be called our 4th branch of government.

VIDEO: How does the media impact the issues?

In serving the essential purpose of educating the public about governmental affairs, our media plays three critical functions: gatekeeper, scorekeeper and watchdog.

As a gatekeeper, the press must decide what to print out of the thousands of notable events that occur every day on this planet.

No matter whether it’s CBS 2, The New York Times or any internet blog—every media outlet must first determine which stories should be labeled as news.

As a scorekeeper, the media is constantly determining the winners of our ongoing political game. This can be as simple as reporting on the status of candidates in a party nomination contest or as complex as determining which political factions the public favors during policy disputes.

As a watchdog, the media reports on the moments when government and its officials do not live up to public expectations. American media law is very supportive of this function as the “Freedom of Information Act” mandates citizens have the right to access a tremendous amount of governmental information that would otherwise remain secret.

Our legal system also punishes the press for libel only if a report is both false and intentionally malicious. This high standard works to protect watchdog reporting because American libel law does not punish reporters who make simple mistakes in their coverage. Add these three features up and any student of government can see that the freedom of the press—and all of its modern forms—is still a vibrant and integral part of life in a healthy American democracy.

_____________

Which of the following best characterizes the influence of the news media on public opinion in the United States?
A. They alter the public's views on issues.
B. They affect which issues the public thinks are important.
C. They determine how citizens will vote.
D. They are most able to influence the college educated.
E. They are most able to influence those living in big cities
___________________

Listen to these podcasts. Bring your AP Review with you. Download now.

Look at the complete Review Guide here.

What is a Republic?
What is Popular Sovereignty?
Why is Federalist 10 so important?
What is the genius of Federalism?
What role does the Media play?

Sample Comparative FRQs

Each weekday between now and May 1, Ken Wedding is posting a question about comparative government and politics.

You submit an answer to the "Questions" e-mail link at the What You Need to Know web site.

(You can also win a pair of WYNTK pencils by posing a question that gets used here.)

Here's Question No. 12:

Since Putin's reforms in the past three years seem to be reducing the choices available to voters, what has he done to promote legitimacy of the Russian regime and his government?

Anonymous' answer is:"I think, that although Putin has narrowed the number of choices on the ballot, he still gave the facade of legitimacy by holding elections"

and"since Putin has a good control of the media in Russia. he also will be able to influence public opinion though the media. which, for the most part, would show him in a good light and having a good impact on the country of Russia and most likely never have anything negative that he has done, which would also give him legitimacy in the light of the people of Russia."

_________________

(From the former Chief Reader)

This would be a two-point question.

My rubric lists the following "things" that could be done to promote the legitimacy of the Russian regime and Putin's government while he was reducing the role of representation (there might be other good answers, but unlike the committees who write rubrics for the exam questions, I'm working alone on this.

• holding apparently competitive elections
• acting nationalistically
• improving standards of living
• maintaining stability and law and order
• demonstrating the power of the government
• acting powerfully in the international sphere
• promoting the appearance of effective government
• organizing public support (like United Russia or Nashi)

There could be several examples for some of those items. Any one would earn a point. Two examples are necessary to earn both possible points.Anonymous' example would earn both points.

Two things to remember:

• The first sentence of Anonymous' answer is important because the rubrics used for the AP exams often require that kind of introduction (although there are no points awarded for it).
• If you're unsure if one of your examples is appropriate, list a third one (or a fourth or a fifth).

Just don't spend too much time on your effort because you need time for the other 7 questions on the FRQ section of the exam. On the AP exam there's no penalty for having more than enough right answers and there's no penalty for having an incorrect response. Your answer begins the grading process by being worth zero (0) points. It will earn points for including appropriate information or logic that are on the graders' rubric. You won't earn extra credit for more right answers than required. For instance, there's no way to get more than 2 points for this question.

http://studyingcomparative.blogspot.com/

Separation of Powers: More is Less

(This will be the first of posts that contain review concepts and questions for the AP American Government and Comparative Exams. This is the first posted by CBS2School.com)

The separation of powers is the theoretical and institutional footing of the American form of government. It was devised as a safeguard against tyranny through the strict division and distribution of governing responsibilities. Our Founding Fathers saw the separation of powers as a defense against the natural propensity to abuse power by diluting, checking and balancing the legitimate duties of government. The separation of powers limits government.

VIDEO: Understanding The Separation Of Powers

James Madison put it best in Federalist 47, “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, selfappointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”

Thomas Paine wrote that in our beginning, we had the chance to “start the world over.” At our founding, the political discourse was animated by great thinking. Thoughts were stirred by great writing. America’s theoretical framework was not determined by a public opinion poll. Rather, our ramparts are rooted in a philosophical discourse which history has conducted over many thousands of years. “We the people” of these United States have ratified a system of government which at best is still an experiment. We have amalgamated from the best minds, their best plans and their best guesses toward that which best safeguards our inalienable rights. Our foremost enemy is an oppressive abuse of power. Its most frequented foe, tyranny. The great thinkers agreed that in order to preserve liberty the duties of government had to be divided. The power of the purse (legislative branch) and the power of the sword (executive branch) could not be in the same hands. In this separation of powers we find our most cherished principle. Unless we buy in, the architects of our civilization were builders of temporary housing.

Today’s Question:
(1) Checks and balances is at the heart of our Constitution. Which of the following is an example:

(a) The Supreme Court’s use of original jurisdiction.
(b) Licensing differences between states.
(c) Congress writing laws to regulate the economy.
(d) Congress’ power to override a Presidential veto.
(e) Using the Electoral College to choose our President.

What other questions do you have about American foundations? Do you think that it is important for students of politics to understand our beginnings?

Politics and the English language

It’s now under a month till the AP Test, so it’s never too early to take some advice that has stood the test of time in politics…and political science classes.

(From George Orwell: “Politics and the English Language,” first published: Horizon, GB, London. April 1946)

In the essay, Orwell wrote:"[The English language]... becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish... the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts... Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits one can think more clearly... so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers..."

In arguing against "staleness of imagery" and "lack of precision," Orwell warns writers to avoid

• "Dying Metaphors" (instead we should use new and vital comparisons)
• "Verbal False Limbs" (he suggests simple, direct, active verbs)
• "Pretentious Diction" ("Um, George," I want to ask, "Isn't a phrase like 'verbal false limbs' a bit pretentious?")
• "Meaningless Words" (like "romantic, plastic, values, human, dead, sentimental, natural, vitality...")

In the essay, Orwell offers these rules:

1. Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
2. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
4. Never use the passive where you can use the active.
5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous ("Um, George, I know what you mean by 'barbarous,' but what was what you said about 'meaningless words?'")

_______________________

Ken Wedding, after reading exams for a dozen years, has some more suggestions to offer exam writers:

• make sure they're clear about cause and effect relationships in their answers. The most common logical error I read in exams was the confusion of causal relationships. It was more common that factual errors.
• avoid pronouns, even if that makes their answers sound "clunky." If students want an exam reader to know what they, as test takers mean, students don't want to leave any doubt about what "it" or "they" or "her" refers to. People sitting for exams are not writing literature; instead students should be trying to demonstrate what they know and how well they can think about what they know. (If students proofread an answer, they can add arrows to any vague pronouns to indicate antecedents. Exam readers will read the arrows.)
• be explicit about points they want to make. That will make the answer more succinct and more likely to be understood. Vaguely explaining poor reasoning doesn't make the reasoning any better. Long, rambling explanations are most often signals that writers don't know what to say.
• follow Orwell's rules
• practice, practice, practice

Shedding light on deplorable human rights record

American actor Richard Gere said yeterday, "China wanted these Olympics to show off....They're not going to be allowed to show off unless they have created a society worthy of showing off."

In light (forgive the pun) of the International Olympic Torch Relay protests, world-wide attention has been is spreading like a wild fire on China's woeful human rights record and its cleavage with Tibet. Your Hausss text asked the question:

"Will the Chinese State continue to be able to put down protests like the one in Tiananmen Square in 1989, especially if they get larger and more violent."

While not more violent, is this protest larger -- as it is being played out on an international stage? And how do you think it will play out?

MSNBC's David Schuster looked at the relay "row" in this report:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24036634#24036634

And the Economist.com writes about how the Chinese government is preparing to put the fire out on this protest.

http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11003821

Who Speaks for Islam?

Who speaks for America? Who speaks for African Americans? Who speaks for Catholics?

It seems to me you would all say these are ridiculous questions. Isn't it, "We, the People?"

Then why do extremists and terrorism too often monopolize the media's coverage and thus the message coming out of the Muslim world? Why is it that a robust anti-Americanism seems to pervade the Muslim world? Is it the sign of a clash of cultures – do they hate who we are? Or is it what we do?

Rather than listening to extremists or simply relying on the opinions of individual pundits, why not give voice to the silenced majority?

The purpose of this post is to try to get through (MSM promoted?) the cultural stereotypes we may be looking through when we analayze the political systems of states like Iran ruled by Sharia (Muslim) Law -- or more importantly -- the poltical culture what ("We the People") are saying...in the Muslim world....if there is such a thing?

First, Al Arabia reports on a massive project in which Gallup pollsters interviewed 50,000 people in 35 Muslim countries. The results have been published in a book called Who Speaks for Islam? What a billion Muslims really think.

"A recent survey gathered on what Muslims truly think of the West revealed that Muslims feel disrespected by the West and although they admire Western values they feel that democracy when applied in Muslim countries was hypocritical...



"'Despite widespread anti-American and anti-British sentiment, Muslims around the world said they in fact admired much of what the West holds dear', including freedom of speech and citizens, democracy, technological progress and access to knowledge, co-author Dalia Mogahed said.



[She continued] "'When we asked Muslims around the world what the West can do to improve relations with the Muslim world, the most frequent responses were for the West to demonstrate more respect for Islam and to regard Muslims as equals, not as inferior.'..."

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2008/04/07/47995.html


Second, from Salek:



"I just wanted to tell you about a Canadian sitcom called "Little Mosque on the Prairie."

It's about a Muslim community in a small town of ruralCanada and the challenges they face from within and outside their community.



The show is currently airing its second season on CBC and is HUGELYpopular in Canada, and has received rave reviews from critics.



I wanted to bring this to your attention because so much in the newsand media these days is negative coverage of Muslims (i.e. Danishcartoons). This show challenges those stereotypes and misconceptionsand does it effectively through humor.



I appreciate the show not just for the laughs, but also for it'srealistic portrayal of issues facing Muslims such as the gap betweenconservative and progressive Muslims and post 9/11 fears (propelled bya hillarious Rush Limbaugh-esque radio host). The issues may be seriousbut the show maintains a light-hearted tone."



Here's what the NY Times had to say:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE7D81030F935A25752C0A9619C8B63&scp=1&sq=little+mosque+prairie&st=nyt



http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=4689644836814333621

Christiane Amanpour’s E-Ran

http://courseweb.hopkins.k12.mn.us/mod/resource/view.php?id=13385

Last year, CNN.com ran a hilarious TV marketing campaign, placing CNN's on-air talent in Spinal-Tappish situations. It's nice to see CNN let down their hair a little.

Here’s hoping we all let our hair down a little as well, before we get down preparing for the AP Test (s), 31 days away as of last Friday.

We will start Amanpour’s birthplace – E-Ran ­­on Thursday. Attatched here are links to great review sites for both the Comparative and American Government tests. During the last two weeks of class, we will use the review format from the Hopkins High School (MN) site.

Go to: http://courseweb.hopkins.k12.mn.us/course/view.php?id=434
and focus on the FRQ Writing Guide under General Course Documents, as well as the Practice MCQs & FRQs and the Election Systems Review Chart

Follow the blog regularly for other links and posts to review for both tests on May 5.

Mexico-California cleavage? Absolut drinks to that!

Back to the Blog after a few days off! Use these entries as a way to think and review about Mexico's past and future. Remember, we test on the United States of Mexico on Tuesday. Do not confuse the geography with the political culture divide illustrated in the above vodka marketing campaign:

The latest advertising campaign in Mexico from Swedish vodka maker Absolut promises to push all the right buttons south of the U.S. border, but it could ruffle a few feathers in El Norte.The billboard and press campaign, created by advertising agency Teran\TBWA and now running in Mexico, is a colorful map depicting what the Americas might look like in an "Absolut" -- i.e., perfect -- world.

The U.S.-Mexico border lies where it was before the Mexican-American war of 1848 when California, as we now know it, was Mexican territory and known as Alta California.

Following the war, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo saw the Mexican territories of Alta California and Santa Fé de Nuevo México ceded to the United States to become modern-day California, Texas, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado and Arizona.

The campaign taps into the national pride of Mexicans, according to Favio Ucedo, creative director of leading Latino advertising agency Grupo Gallegos in the U.S.

Ucedo, who is from Argentina, said: “Mexicans talk about how the Americans stole their land, so this is their way of reclaiming it. It’s very relevant and the Mexicans will love the idea.”

But he said that were the campaign to run in the United States, it might fall flat.

“Many people aren’t going to understand it here. Americans in the East and the North or in the center of the county -- I don’t know if they know much about the history.

“Probably Americans in Texas and California understand perfectly and I don’t know how they’d take it.”

Meanwhile, the campaign has been circulating on the blogs and generating strong responses from people north of the border.

“I find this ad deeply offensive, and needlessly divisive. I will now make a point of drinking other brands. And 'vodka and tonic' is my drink,” said one visitor, called New Yorker, on MexicoReporter.com.

______________________

Enviromental rules waived for Mexican border fence

The LA Times reports this week that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security plans to waive federal and state enviromental laws to finish more than 670 miles of barrier fencing along the U.S.-Mexican border.

The two waivers, which were approved by Congress, will allow Homeland Security to slash through a thicket of more than 30 environmental and cultural laws to speed construction.

Environmentalists and local officials have strenuously opposed some of the planned infrastructure projects, saying they will damage the land and disrupt wildlife.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-na-fence2apr02,0,876305.story

Consider the legitimacy of "Rule of Law" here. Once again, is this a theoretical, relative and conceptual term in today today's practice of politics/governing.

_____________________________

The power of national symbols

Petroleos Mexicanos (Pemex) is an important bit of national pride and a symbol of Mexico's revolution and independence. However, like many parastatals and huge corporations, it's not as "agile" as smaller businesses in adapting to changing economic, technological, and environmental conditions.

Presidents Fox and Calderón have urged constitutional changes to allow private and even foreign companies to enter the oil industry in Mexico. Reactions of most Mexican politicians have not been kind to those proposals. (Tinkering with national symbols isn't easy. In the USA, think about reactions to proposals that the Star Spangled Banner be replaced with something less militaristic.) Besides there are all those jobs to "hand out."

Business Week magazine puts a good face on the presidential proposals, but acknowledges that the issue is far from resolved.

Mexico may let foreign cos. extract oil

"Mexico's ruling party wants to allow the state oil monopoly to contract with private and foreign companies to extract reserves from the Gulf of Mexico...

"The proposal comes amid a fierce debate over how to reform the country's energy sector and boost Pemex's production."Mexico's constitution bans most private and foreign involvement in the sector, but in practice, the government has eased the restrictions slightly in the past 15 years..."

Pemex lacks the equipment and expertise to develop deep-water oil fields..."Pemex's production has been steadily falling, dropping 5.3 percent to an average 3.1 million barrels a day in 2007 -- primarily due to plunging output at its biggest-yielding field, Cantarell.

"But opponents say the government is manipulating figures to create a false sense of crisis."

Former presidential candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador of the leftist Democratic Revolution Party has said that opening Pemex to private investment would threaten national sovereignty, and he has accused Calderón's administration of seeking to privatize the entire oil industry -- a charge the president denies..."

See also: Celebrations, protests, and questions