Real Clear Politics- Dantea Johnson

The Article I read was titled "on capital hill, Trump wins week one", alluding to President-elect Trump's cabinet nominees going under grueling confirmation hearings.  Being that many of Trump's nominations are controversial they seem to be headed toward a smooth confirmation. In this article it discussed seven of Trumps picks Attorney General-designate Jeff Sessions, Homeland Security Secretary-designate John Kelly, Secretary of State-designate Rex Tillerson, Transportation Secretary-designate Elaine Chao, alongside Defense Secretary-designate James Mattis, Housing and Urban Development Secretary-designate Ben Carson, and lastly CIA Director-designate Mike Pompeo; stood up against Senate committees this week. The 2 most scandalous of the seven confirmation hearings, were that of Attorney General-designate Jeff Sessions, Secretary of State-designate Rex Tillerson. Attorney General-designate Jeff Sessions was attacked by so many Democrats and how could they resist the moment to indict a Republican of being a racist, but Sessions was so well scripted and prepared that it really didn't scratch his image. Then you have former CEO of Exxon Mobil Secretary of State-designate Rex Tillerson, showed everyone what they all knew which is he is not qualified for the position. To make matters worse Tillerson had yet to receive a security clearance, and he had barely any answer to a majority of the question asked by the Senate committee.

A Time to Kill response- Dantea Johnson

1. Is What CLH does "justice"?

             Justice is the quality of being just or of moral rightness. In the eyes of the court and many others what Carl Lee Haley did is immoral and even licentious, but yet in the eyes of a man who has put himself in the position that Carl Lee Haley is in it's as simple as an "eye for an eye". For this man's daughter to be raped, and left for dead hanging from a branch that was not strong enough to hold her up, that is enough to say that Carl Lee Haley killing those two boys who raped his daughter is merely justice.

2. Why does CLH commit this crime?

           A mans daughter beaten viciously, raped, deprived of her innocence, and left to die; kills the men who are responsible for committing this inhuman act towards his daughter out of rage and with great indignation. A daughter is a fathers pride and joy, she brings out the warmth and softness of him that no one usually sees. Carl Lee Haley daughter, his pride and joy, his precious innocent child had been stripped of her innocence and when a father's daughter is viciously attacked he will go through great lengths to protect her.

3. What should CLH punishment be? 
     
          In the movie Carl Lee Haley is not guilty and I believe he should have no punishment. "Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are"(Benjamin Franklin). I believe when Mr. Brigance made his final statement before the court and the jury, having them imagining Tanya Haley as their own daughter and being in the same predicament that Carl Lee Haley is in, it showed they are no more different then Carl Lee Haley. What Carl Lee Haley did was just and therefore he should serve no punishment. 

4. Are the scales of justice balanced where this story takes place?

          This movie takes place in Canton, Mississippi, around the 80s or 90s, in the south where racism and discrimination are still alive and black people are looked upon as nothing more than dogs. If anything the scale of justice is heavily in favor of the white man and the white community, which made it seem impossible for Carl Lee Haley to be declared anything but guilty. 

5. Does it/should it matter whether Tanya Haley was white or black?

          No it shouldn't matter whether Tanya Haley is white or black, because race shouldn't play a part in justice; sadly in the world we live in it does. In the film up until Mr. Brigance enthralled the jury, they all had no sympathy for Tanya Haley not because they didn't believe what happened but, do to the color of her skin; because they didn't just see a young innocent girl but, they saw a black girl. 

6. Does due process work for CLH like it would any other defendant? 

           Yes in most cases, because he was given a fair trial. Though he had been counted out and seen as guilty from the jump he was submitted a fair trial in front of a jury. His case is tried and later on he was determined not guilty, which clearly shows he had been given his right to a fair trial. 

         

Real Clear Politics EC Reyanna

I read an article from Real Clear Politics titled "Why the Media Lose to Trump". It was a really interesting article and is especially relevant right now, as Trump continues to have very hostile relations with the media. For the entirety of his campaign, Trump has painted himself as a anti-establishment outsider, claiming the system and the media are rigged against him. Regardless of whether this was true or not, his supporters ate it up. Trump painted himself as a victim of a biased, partisan media. So when the media is actually hostile to him, it just feeds into that narrative that he has created and gives truth to his claims. Even when legitimate questions are raised, Trump always turns back to how he is being "treated unfairly." The media really can't win anymore, at least among Trump's supporters.

Eyes on the Prize- Nick Baumann

The scene that had the greatest impact was the one where Emmett Till's mother holds and open casket to the Chicago public. This had a lasting effect on the Civil Rights act because it showed how low the whites would stoop to preserve their way of life. By showing his mangled body, she sickened many and persuaded them to take a stand in the fight for equal rights. It is difficult to imagine how his mother felt, and how she contained her emotions enough to not act irrationally. She had a lot of courage opening her son's casket and presenting it to the public. I think that action made an impact that would help promote the fight for Civil Rights in the South, and around the country.

A Time to Kill Natalie Lovinger

A Time to Kill
1. Is what Carl Lee Haley does "Justice"?
This question is subjective, but I personally don't think what he did was justice. It was completely reasonable for him to be angry and to want them dead. Because he knew that the justice system would fail him and let the men who raped his 10 year old daughter off with only a few years in jail he wanted to take the law into his own hands. I think it was reasonable that he was acquitted because he wasn't thinking clearly, but I don't think that it was justice
2. Carl Lee kills the men because they raped and attempted to murder his 10 year old daughter
3. I think he should have, and was, acquitted. He was acting on his emotions and acting out of insanity because of his fragile state.
4. The scales of justice are not balanced. Carl Lee Haley was a black man being judged by a completely white jury, which would be biased against him. Justice would also not having been given to the two men because they were white and wouldn't have been punished as severely.
5. I think it matters in the south because to them the rape of a black girl is less important than the rape of a white girl, but it shouldn't matter. Tanya should get her justice no matter the color of her skin.
6. No, Carl Lee and his lawyer have to work harder and use unorthodox methods to get their justice.

Real Clear Politics Response - Miles Lynn

Miles Lynn

1/10/17

AP Government and Politics

I read an opinion piece by Anders Fogh Rasmussen, a former prime minister of Denmark and former secretary general of NATO. Anders talked about Trump and shared his views on how he feels Trump could positively impact or strengthen America's global leadership. One point Anders makes is that of the people he has appointed in his cabinet, most are “globally respected figures from business and military”. He also goes on to say Trump will be an “outside the box” type of president, and will be able to “look at the global stage with fresh eyes”. After reading I could see the point Anders is trying to make. This author seems like a smart man, he has impressive credentials, so I think I’m going to trust him on his views on Trump in regards to American Leadership, for the most part. Just knowing Trump, who he is and what he is done, it is hard to see him being better at restoring America's global leadership then some of the past presidents. I feel like most of the world will view Trump as a threat and not an ally, making it harder for him to strengthen America's global leadership.

Source: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-president-trump-can-restore-americas-global-leadership-2017-01-10?mod=mw_share_twitter

I read an opinion piece by John Kass, a writer for the Chicago Tribune, with an article title of “Before the president from Chicago says farewell, there’s disappointment”. Before even reading the article, based off the title, I thought he’d talk about how Obama saying good bye and having Trump as the next president would be a huge disappointment. But instead I read an opinion piece that was a full of ridiculous opinions on our (soon to be former president) Obama. Kass talks about how Obama is leaving after 8 year, and leaving the American people and his legacy with disappointment. He went on to say Obama in his 8 years failed to make a great, and not even a good, legacy with failed policies and promises. Going on to say that Obama was built up by the media to be this “messiah” and that he was nowhere close to being a messiah or Jesus. Then going on to say how whatever parts would be considered his legacy will be undone (Obama Care and other policies). Now after reading I couldn't help but disagree. Now I was not following his presidency back in 2008-2012 because I was only 8-12 years old. But as I have grown into my older teenage years I followed it and saw it was pretty successful, and like all presidents there was some failure. But a lot of good came out of Obama presidency. And I believe no matter what of Obama's policies get repealed, he will still have the legacy of becoming the first African-American president of the United States.

Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-obama-farewell-speech-kass-0111-20170110-column.html

A Time to Kill Response - Miles Lynn

Miles Lynn

1/10/17

AP Government and Politics

A TIme to Kill

1. Is what Carl Lee Haley does “Justice”?

It is really hard to say, because on one hand if he hadn’t killed those two men, they most likely would have got away with the rape and almost murder of Carl’s daughter. But then again, you can’t really say they were going to be acquitted because no one can see the future. In my opinion though, I feel under the circumstances it was just. Given the time period, and location of the trail, it is a safe bet those two men would have been set free. The only way to bring justice was to take matters into one's own hands.

2. Why does CLH commit this crime?

The reason he committed this crime was really for what I said above, it wasn’t going to be a just trial. Justice is supposed to be blind, but if the trial for that little girls rape was held, it is a very good chance that the trial wouldn’t be blind. Carl knew this, and he couldn’t just let these men get away with such a terrible offense. He could not see the men who raped his 10 year old daughter get away with no punishment. Carl felt the two men should die for what they did, so he did what he felt was right in his mind and took their life.

3. What should CLH punishment be?

I think Carl should serve some amount of jail time. I’m not saying life in prison, but maybe in between 10-30 years. What Carl did is not a crime that can be overlooked, he took the life of two fellow human beings, even if they were terrible people. But I feel what occurred to cause Carl to kill the two men should be taken into effect. If you are a parent and you have a 10 year old daughter and she got raped and left to die, I can guarantee 9 out of 10 parents would want the criminal dead and if not dead locked up for life. So I would say a punishment of 10-30 years in prison.

4. Are the scales of “Justice” balanced where this story takes place?

The answer to that is no. This movie takes place in the south in the 1980s, that right there tells you there is racism. Not only that, but the KKK plays a semi big role in the film, alluding to what type of town it is, what the feel is towards African Americans. The jury during the trial is an all white jury, that can’t be fair especially if an African American man is in the trial. The judge is white too, so how can it be balanced if it is an all white town, with a white judge and jury, and the KKK trying to harm everyone involved with the case on the CLH side.

5. Does it/should it matter whether Tanya Haley is black or white?

I feel like should it matter no, but in this case I think it matters. With an all white jury, they wouldn’t care for some random African American child. Most of the town is against blacks anyway, why would it be different with this child. Now compare it to a little white girl, with an all white jury and there would be no debate. The rapist would be charged quickly without debate.

6. Does due process work for CLH like it would any other defendant?

I don’t really think so, CLH is in a white environment, in a town that already doesn't really like African American, and he is now an trial for killing two white men with an all white jury. That is almost like the most unideal situation for due process, he has the right to a fair trial, but he isn’t getting one where he is at right now. And probably won’t get one because the trial is staying in that town and there is just now way it could be fair given the circumstances and all that has happened.

Time To Kill - Josh Shawver-Weiner

1.    What Carl Lee did is justice of the heart and soul. It is not justice in the context or eyes of the law. In my eyes two men did a heinous crime and Carl Lee need to enact his own justice. I would do the same or at least I would like too.

2.    Carl Lee Hailey did this retaliation and for revenge of the murder/rape of his daughter. A eye for an eye is the idea.

3.    If Carl Lee Haley was truly insane he should be placed in a mental institution for treatment. He did commit a crime and whether or not it is justified the law is the law and he should be placed in jail if he is not insane.

4.    The scales are strongly biased. In this small Mississippi town it is unheard of that a Black person would receive a fair trial. The jurors carry their own biases and prejudices into the courtroom with them and so does the judge. This shown by the extreme reaction and division of the town as a result of this trial. 

5.    No it should not matter, it should never matter. But, in this town it did/does - it took Jake Brigance to depetic the intense rape,torture and eventual murder and then in the end told the jury to imagine that same case but this time the girl is white not black. Up until that moment the jury’s decision was still up in the air.

6.    In the end it may have taken a while but Carl Lee does eventually receive his fair trial. It was a long road though far too long. Thankfully, in the end the scales of justice were equal.

a time to kill Thomas Neumann

I think what Carl Lee Haley does is justice, these men raped, beat, and attempted to kill his daughter, if the nurse didn't break they would have murdered her. If they got charged it most likely would have been for around 20 years in prison then they could walk. No person to do the type of things those men did should walk. So CLH took things into his own hand and killed them so they could never do what they did to his daughter this was justice and what they deserved but that doesn't necessarily mean it was the right thing to do. I think CLH should have no punishment, as they expressed in the movie most people would've reacted the same way, and they claimed he was momentarily insane. He had no control over his actions so he should not be punished. He was already punished enough when his daughter was raped and beaten. This movie took place deep in the south so I think justice was different depending whether you were black or white. I don't think it should matter whether Tanya Haley is black or white but being realistic I think it did in the movie. I think CLH would have lost but won it at the closing arguments when the jury was told to imagine Tanya was white because when they pictured that that realized how horrible it was when it was to someone they cared about. Due process did not work for CLH in this movie. Due process was not able to work for CLH he was not able to have a fair trial because the judge refused to move the trial to a different site even though the judge himself knew it would be completely unfair to hold the trial in the original location. Just because he won doesn't mean it was a fair trial.

Real Clear Politics- Bronson Engel

The U.S. is becoming more racially diverse. But Democrats may not benefit. A woman named Lilla from Columbia University believes that she thinks a reason that Hillary Clinton did not win the election is because she was focusing to much on specific groups of people like minorities, religions, occupations and she did not really appeal to the white working class. Some people might view her as racist and that she is trying to abandon the minorities, people of religion or specific occupations. It is shown that the democrats are losing white votes in recent elections including those of the House and Senate, to compensate for those lost votes they rely heavily on the majority of the minority vote. This might be a good thing for the democratic party in the future because America is diversifying more and more each year and soon the Democratic might hold the popularity among the entire United States. Although, relying on the majority of the minority vote is more problematic than people realize. And as recent patterns shows most commonly among U.S. born Asians and Latinos they complicate with the white/majority of the population. This shows that those "minorities" might behave more politically like whites than the common assumptions show. Overall, without winning a large share of the white vote, there should not be much optimism about the Democratic political strength. 

A Time To Kill- Bronson Engel

What Carl Lee Haley did any sane man would have done. Two red-necks raped his daughter and expected to completely get away with it. What made my heart turn inside was when the police officer went into the bar to arrest those two men and they acted surprised that they were getting arrested so they started resisting. The thing that made be ache was how a human being can be raised in such a way that he thinks that he can rape a young 10 year old girl, beat her, and expect them to walk away. During the movie when they got arrested I was relieved because I knew, like any person with common sense, that justice had to be made. I must have been stupid because I thought that they would either get life or be sentenced to death but when I heard that they would have probably just gotten a couple years it made me realize what kind of world people lived in. Carl Lee knew that all the juries were always white and the verdicts always went against the African Americans. He knew that he had to bring those men to justice but at the same time he knew that he was going to die unjustly. This movie was amazing and I think that every citizen of America should be required to see this movie because it is not biased at all, the movie is not trying to persuade you into hating or loving a certain group of people. The movie is simply stating the facts that has happened in our country just when my parents and grandparents were alive. 



      

A time to kill -Nick Baumann

What Carl Lee Haley does is justice. The two red-necks who raped his daughter were going to be brought to justice, one way or the other. By law they would have served the maximum amount of time in jail, or the death penalty. Carl Lee Haley takes it upon himself to do the work of an inevitable execution. He commits the crime out of vengeance for his daughter. Infuriated with the situation, he takes out his anger on the men who committed this foul act on his young daughter. Carl Lee Haley's punishment should be a medium amount of jail time, if any, because, although he commits double murder, it is partially justified what the men had done to his daughter. They had taken away her ability to reproduce and continue his family name, something that any parent would be devastated over. No, the scales of justice could not be more unbalanced where the story takes place. In the South, there is a heightened amount of racism and hate towards African Americans, and that is why the jury was hesitant to allow Carl Lee to be deemed innocent. It should not matter whether Tanya Haley is black, but sadly it does, especially where the story takes place. The jury and the town did not sympathize as much for Tanya, as they would have for her if she had been white. More people of the town would have sided with Carl and his family, if they had been white. Due process for Carl is slowed and he is forced to be held in a cell far longer than any person should. This ties back to racism and that if Carl would have been white a different path of due process would have been taken, most likely a faster trial and hearing.

A Time to Kill - Ben Ellman

1. No, what Carl Lee Haley did was not justice. Even though those boys did deserve to die for what they did, that does not mean that Haley should have killed him. Everyone deserves a fair trial, no matter what they did or are accused of. I understand that Haley was feeling helpless because of the inherent bias in the courts, but he should at least allow the justice system to run its course. Haley did what any distressed, furious father would do. He tried to defend its daughter, but in reality, nothing he could do would reverse what happened to his daughter.
2. CLH knows that these boys will probably get off easy because of the racism in the Deep South, so he kills them because he thinks it is the only sure way to get justice. CLH is distraught because of what they did to his daughter, so his anger controls him and makes him kill those men.
3. I don’t think CLH should receive a punishment. CLH was “insane” at the time the crime took place, and could not control his actions. So, CLH should not get a punishment. He was trying to protect his daughter, and was frustrated because of the racist court system.
4. The justice scale was unbalanced because of how segregated the south was and because of the racism present during the time. The South has a lot of ingrained racism because of the history there. A history of slavery and Jim Crow have caused some in the South, especially those in rural communities without much education, to continue a pattern of racism.
5. No, it shouldn’t matter whether Tanya Haley was black or white. Tanya was a little girl, regardless of race, who was innocent and deserved nothing that happened to her. However, her race did play a significant factor in the crime and trial. If she was white, not only would the trial have been better for CLH, the crime probably would not have been committed. The court would have most likely been more sympathetic to a white man with a white daughter than to a black man with a black daughter.  
6. Due process should work but because of the racism that was present during the time it interfered with CLH’s right to due process. Everyone deserves a right to a fair trial, and their right to due process. I think if race wasn’t a factor then this case would have gone unnoticed and not have received as much attention as it did.

Trump"s Cabinet- Nuala and Griffin

Wilbur Ross- self made billionaire

Bachelor's degree- Yale

Master's degree- Harvard

Served as trump’s economic policy advisor during the campaign.

Although he has ample amounts of business experience, he has never held a government position and will now be in charge of US business domestically and abroad.

He served 24 years as a banker with much experience in bankruptcy and corporate restructuring.

He found his own firm, W.L. Ross in 2000 that works to revive dying companies by buying them.

He has plenty of experience in the business world so he will be an asset to the cabinet in that way because he has a different perspective from the rest of the government working members, but the fact that he doesn’t have any experience in a government position could be problematic because he doesn’t know how the system works.

He calls himself the “king of debt” because he claims that he has no fear of borrowing money and often times uses his debt to finance his acquisitions. Our country has a large debt already so that could pose a problem and put us in a worse situation.

His policies will be a complete 180 turn around from current secretary of commerce penny pritzker who strongly supports free trade. This large change could make it hard to succeed because there will be so much change to be made and so much ground to cover.

The policy that Trump proposed about helping the working class is now directly under Ross’s control. This could be a conflict of interest because such a successful businessman like Ross may not have the best interest of the working class in mind.

Steven Mnuchin- Treasury secretary

Bachelor's degree- Yale

Mnuchin served as the Trump campaign finance chairman.

Mnuchin has 17 years of experience working for an investment bank called Goldman Sachs. On top of this he invested in a failed house lender company called IndyMac while working as chairman and CEO of the company. Eventually he sold this company and began working with Trump on his campaign in terms of finance. Mnuchin has a lot of experience in investing and running a company. Success for Mnuchin is not probable given his lack of political experience. Although he has a lot of knowledge in this field, this does not necessarily mean he will succeed in a political position.  ¨The wealthy hedge fund manager, Hollywood financier and former Goldman Sachs trader lacks experience in public policy but is seen as someone who can speak the language of Wall Street bankers.¨

Stephen K. Bannon- Chief Strategist

Bachelor's degree- Virginia Tech

Master's degree- Georgetown University

Master of business degree- Harvard Law

Bannon worked as Trumps chief executive officer during his campaign.

Bannon is a very educated man that lacks any sort of political experience. Prior to working with Trump, Bannon worked for a commentary website with multiple questionable opinions. Bannon being successful depends on the way Trumps presidency starts off. It could be a train wreck that many Americans expect. ¨Before Mr. Bannon became chairman of Mr. Trump’s campaign, he ran Breitbart News, a hard-right news and opinion website that often publishes nationalist, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim and racist sentiments. Mr. Bannon holds the same anti-establishment views of many of Mr. Trump’s supporters, though he was educated at Harvard and Georgetown and became wealthy working in entertainment and finance.¨