Everyone loves the winter holidays! Why shouldn't you? All the presents, family reunions, presents, the yummy food, presents, the drinks, and of course the PRESENTS! I love presents. I guess you could say I'm a spoiled brat because I got everything I asked for. My Christmas day was pretty fun. This is the first year we (my intermediate family) have hosted Christmas and it was great. The food was delicious (compliments to my stepmami) and the drinks (Spanish type of beverages) were just awesome. My family was well behaved for once. No drama, no fighting. It kind of felt weird actually. We did the classic Secret Santa and of course no one was really surprised because everyone kind of had an idea of who had gotten them. All in all it was good.
Winter holidays are a time to rejoice, relax, and reboost your energy for the next year. This is how I think most Americans spend it anyways. Celebrating with family and thanking everyone for the presents (even those you hate). It's traditional to spend it with your family and party for New Years. Which is definitely what most Americans do. We are always looking for excuses to go out and have fun. Holidays are spent by most Americans eating, drinking, and having a good time. Which is how I'm spending mine. What an American!
Monday, December 29, 2008
Monday, December 22, 2008
Ebay Work
As I was on ebay I saw how many options and varieties of different types of things there were. I wasn't really interested in buying anything off of ebay but I did it for the assignment. It was amazing how much junk people put on line and other people bid on. I bought nail files because my stepmother said she needed them so I got them. I hope they're new because I wouldn't use nail files that were used.
This assignment showed me how the manufacturers have to eliminate competition, competition for market price, and labor market. Bidders have to outbid the others and the people who are posting up the auctions have to make their deals sound better then others that are auctioning the same thing. This relates to what we were talking about in class because Andy explained all these things to the class when we were going over capitalism. It also relates to the auction we had in class because we saw strategies used like snipe bidding.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Constitution Part Tres
My question is why did 11-15 take so long to become amendments? These amendments indicate a very strong turning point in U.S. history. They show when people all started actually getting the same rights. Amendment 12 has to do with choosing the president and vice but I find boring so I'm not going to go over it. Amendment 13 is all about slavery and "involuntary servitude" (which I think they added just to make the amendment longer because it's the same thing) being abolished except if it used as a punishment to a crime. That's kind of mean. Criminals have to be slaves is what that's saying. This amendment includes all of the U.S. and those other countries we like to boss around. Numero 14 states a lot of stuff that I didn't understand but I know it says that people who are born in the United States are citizens and the government can't take our rights away. Then it says something about how Indians weren't included in the state population which is messed up because before the Whites came they were the state's populations. The 15th amendment is saying everyone could vote no matter what race which is how we got to having our first Black president. Obama better be thankful of this one.
I think this was the time for these laws to be passed because of how much controversy and rebellion was going on at the time. The United States was in complete chaos with all the talk about everyone being equal and protecting all the citizens rights. The whites of high up were finally outnumbered and didn't know what else to do. So they gave in and then tried to make it seem like they did it because America needed a change. Whites needed to view Blacks as their equals.
The most important amendment from 16-27, I think is amendment 19. This is when women were finally allowed to vote. Before the 1920's there was no way they would let a women do these things. I think when we began voting is when we were finally recognized as a threat to men. Not just with voting, but with working too. It is a starting point for people to start waking up and seeing that times were changing and women were strong. We still have a long way to go in being treated as equals to men but I think this was the beginning of finally being recognized as a competitor.
I think this was the time for these laws to be passed because of how much controversy and rebellion was going on at the time. The United States was in complete chaos with all the talk about everyone being equal and protecting all the citizens rights. The whites of high up were finally outnumbered and didn't know what else to do. So they gave in and then tried to make it seem like they did it because America needed a change. Whites needed to view Blacks as their equals.
The most important amendment from 16-27, I think is amendment 19. This is when women were finally allowed to vote. Before the 1920's there was no way they would let a women do these things. I think when we began voting is when we were finally recognized as a threat to men. Not just with voting, but with working too. It is a starting point for people to start waking up and seeing that times were changing and women were strong. We still have a long way to go in being treated as equals to men but I think this was the beginning of finally being recognized as a competitor.
Constitution Part Dos
In Article 4, Sections 1 and 2, Clause 1 of Section 2, it talks about how each state would respect the other state's laws. It then goes on to say that Americans have the same "Privileges and Immunities" throughout the United States. Andy asked us in the assignment to think about what that would mean for gay marriages. In the beginning it would mean that whether the state decided if that was permitted was up to them and the other states do as they please. If you then read on it contradicts itself by saying that citizsens have the same rights everywhere in the U.S. That was interesting to me how they never really noticed that with certain things that part of the Constitution could be misleading.
Now if we move along to Article 6, Section 3, they start to discuss how the government officers shall be asked to take an "Oath" to state that they will uphold the Constitution but no religious test will ever be administered. This seems completely fair to me being that I am not prejudice and think that no matter what religion you are it shouldn't matter. It does seem a little odd however that they would choose religion as part of this section. Why not race? It should have said no race, religion, gender, etc should matter when being appointed a government official as long as you uphold the Constitution. Think that needs to be revised.
If the Constitution restricted the government from our right to practice our religion, speak, publish and express our views, petiton, or ask the government to change the law, then why have so many people been persecuted for doing what our Founding Fathers said they were able to do. People have been abused, put in jail for just doing some of these things yet they were allowed to so what's the problem? An example would be when the Blacks wanted to be treated as equals to White men. They petitioned, wrote articles in papers, and asked the government to help them out. What did the government do? Segregrate them even more and let everyone (citizens and police) abuse them and put them in jail. What made them so different that they couldn't be protected by our FIRST amendment?!
The 4th amendment states that police must have warrants to search people, their houses, or their belongings. Andy asked us if we thought that it was contradicted by the MTA, library, and airport searches. I think that I understand why people might say that this is a contradiction but I think that those things are done for the well-being of others. Which makes them ok. Most of these places that people are searched at are high-risk places for terrorist attacks or just crazy people. If it's to protect our safety I think they can be called an exception to the 4th amendment. By the way, the 4th amendment is crap anyways because I tried to pull that on the cops and they told me that was fine that they would just stake out at my house making sure no one left until they got a warrant.
Now if we move along to Article 6, Section 3, they start to discuss how the government officers shall be asked to take an "Oath" to state that they will uphold the Constitution but no religious test will ever be administered. This seems completely fair to me being that I am not prejudice and think that no matter what religion you are it shouldn't matter. It does seem a little odd however that they would choose religion as part of this section. Why not race? It should have said no race, religion, gender, etc should matter when being appointed a government official as long as you uphold the Constitution. Think that needs to be revised.
If the Constitution restricted the government from our right to practice our religion, speak, publish and express our views, petiton, or ask the government to change the law, then why have so many people been persecuted for doing what our Founding Fathers said they were able to do. People have been abused, put in jail for just doing some of these things yet they were allowed to so what's the problem? An example would be when the Blacks wanted to be treated as equals to White men. They petitioned, wrote articles in papers, and asked the government to help them out. What did the government do? Segregrate them even more and let everyone (citizens and police) abuse them and put them in jail. What made them so different that they couldn't be protected by our FIRST amendment?!
The 4th amendment states that police must have warrants to search people, their houses, or their belongings. Andy asked us if we thought that it was contradicted by the MTA, library, and airport searches. I think that I understand why people might say that this is a contradiction but I think that those things are done for the well-being of others. Which makes them ok. Most of these places that people are searched at are high-risk places for terrorist attacks or just crazy people. If it's to protect our safety I think they can be called an exception to the 4th amendment. By the way, the 4th amendment is crap anyways because I tried to pull that on the cops and they told me that was fine that they would just stake out at my house making sure no one left until they got a warrant.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Wal-mart worker killed: Coincidence or Intentional?!
Was it on purpose or was it a mistake that killed the Walmart employee on Black Friday?
Let's find out.
These are the facts as stated on http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local2008/11/28/2008-11-28...
It occured in Valley Stream, Long Island.
The shoppers smashed through the glass doors that the employes so innocently stood in front of.
Four shoppers were also injured though not as serious.
I'm sure people could have cared less that there was a dead man less than 5o feet away from them.
Walmart did reopen at 1pm.
The other things that were included in this article appear to be bullshit. How is it that none of the other workers saw him and couldn't help? If there were so much "additional security" everywhere, how did this happen? Someone had to have been able to get him. It makes no sense to me. What also strikes me as odd is how did one of his coworkers know that it was 200 people that stepped all over him? In the statement his coworker gave it said "He was bum-rushed by 200 people". How did he know that? He did not give an estimate or say about 200 people. No. He said an exact number. What did he sit there and count? And if there were 2000 people gathered around Walmart's doors, what happend to the other 1800? Is that when the cops finally decided to intervene?! Walmart should have known that there was going to be trouble and had paramedics on hand already. I mean with the "big ass sales" (said in my most sarcastic voice) they were having who wouldn't go?! Why was Walmart also packed again within hours of this man's death? Seems like a whole lot of bs to me. This just shows what greedy bastards Anericans are and how big coorporations could care less about anything other than money. By the way, isn't Walmart known for being a family place? You've seen the commercials where the whole white family goes shopping for everything they need at Walmart and always find it no matter how outrageous it may be. I can see how family oriented they are opening 7 hours after there employee died. Way to go Walmart!
Let's find out.
These are the facts as stated on http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local2008/11/28/2008-11-28...
It occured in Valley Stream, Long Island.
The shoppers smashed through the glass doors that the employes so innocently stood in front of.
Four shoppers were also injured though not as serious.
I'm sure people could have cared less that there was a dead man less than 5o feet away from them.
Walmart did reopen at 1pm.
The other things that were included in this article appear to be bullshit. How is it that none of the other workers saw him and couldn't help? If there were so much "additional security" everywhere, how did this happen? Someone had to have been able to get him. It makes no sense to me. What also strikes me as odd is how did one of his coworkers know that it was 200 people that stepped all over him? In the statement his coworker gave it said "He was bum-rushed by 200 people". How did he know that? He did not give an estimate or say about 200 people. No. He said an exact number. What did he sit there and count? And if there were 2000 people gathered around Walmart's doors, what happend to the other 1800? Is that when the cops finally decided to intervene?! Walmart should have known that there was going to be trouble and had paramedics on hand already. I mean with the "big ass sales" (said in my most sarcastic voice) they were having who wouldn't go?! Why was Walmart also packed again within hours of this man's death? Seems like a whole lot of bs to me. This just shows what greedy bastards Anericans are and how big coorporations could care less about anything other than money. By the way, isn't Walmart known for being a family place? You've seen the commercials where the whole white family goes shopping for everything they need at Walmart and always find it no matter how outrageous it may be. I can see how family oriented they are opening 7 hours after there employee died. Way to go Walmart!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
