California's Very Own Death Penalty

My editorial talks about reforming the death penalty and how California’s system currently is dysfunctional and needs reform. One problem of the death penalty is that it is overseen by Supreme Court. The seven justices of California’s Supreme Court are not adequate to solve the death penalty’s system within our state and answer the many petitions of our state as well. The editor proposed that instead of excursively having the supreme court reform the death penalty, the court should be allowed to obtain the capital case workload. This amendment allows Supreme Court to still have authority without all the work falling on their shoulders. Cases would hear and finished at a faster and more accurate pace than the current system. At the end of the article the author states three issues that must also be addressed to make this amendment a reality: funding is needed for an adequate number of prosecutors and defense attorneys, increased staff on court appeals, and lastly death penalties habeas corpus must be reconsidered.
I think the amendment is logical for the state of California. The death penalty within our state has been running with too many loop holes for inaccuracy and false accusation and has been at fault for not giving an equal and fair trial to all not just one side. Its important to see that the death penalty can’t be solved with one amendment but has to be reformed from all supporting sides as well.

Oprah for President

Recently, Oprah has accompanied Obama on many public campaigns incluuding one that occured this week at Universal Citywalk. One article i read, talked about Oprah’s presence within Obama’s campaigns especially in Iowa. There was a fifty minute rally to promote Obama’s campaign. Oprah delivered a speech of her own, claiming she had no influence but to promote people to take action in the following election. She even included Obama’s opposition to the Iraq war and aroused a standing ovation from the audience. Oprah according to mass media is one of the most powerful celebrities of this day and era.I think that Oprah will definitely be a successful person to promote and publicize the positive aspects of Obama within his campaign. Even though she is not directly telling and convincing her fans, to vote for Obama, her acceptance and support for the candidate is a huge statement publicly. Personally I don’t think its correct to use a public figure like Oprah within politics. I remember a couple years ago, the band Dixie Chicks expressed their discontent with President Bush and suffered consequences, but should these be carried over for celebrities supporting political figures as well? what makes Oprah different from other celebrities? Many people can say I have my own views, but people in the public eye such as Oprah can always have an Influence.

Political Parties Shifting to Different Directions

Recently, in ap gov we talked about political parties and the drastic switch from one to the other. Last time this happened, we didn't even exist, and now it is happening right before our eyes.The the switch of popularity of liberalism, and not just any type, specifically gentry liberals. Gentry liberals reflect interests and values of affluent people of globalization and economy. It strongholds are within New York, Washington, Boston, San Francisco, and West Los Angeles. The rank of the affluent class has grown, resulting in this ideology’s popularity. The number of millionaires in the United States rose 26%. The reason for this increase in democratic majority is because it controls the wealthy majority. It has also a large presence on the internet. It also discusses that now both parties do not represent the middle or working classes, but the elite. Since the conservative and liberal are parts of the elite and affluent majority of the population, how do lower and working classes get represented? This shift of parties brought up the point that this transition in power has also significantly ignored a large group of people, the people below the elite are not represented at all. So if you consider yourself a liberal, are you really a liberal does your party really respresent you? Its kind of weird to think something that you believe changes without the core of the party's consent, their followers.

Information from the blog is referenced from the article, “the Gentry Liberals” by Joel Kotkin and Fred Siegal is an editorial from the LA Times. :)