Political Heat

The petition against the television personality is unwarranted -- and unjust CNN’s Piers Morgan isn’t exactly someone you’d ordinarily rush to defend. The former British tabloid editor, judge of “America’s Got Talent,” and replacement host of Larry King’s former talk show spot, doesn’t exactly reach the criteria for someone worth caring that much over. With that said, Morgan’s recent stance on gun control in America is commendable -- and the response to it from gun owners is deplorable . Morgan recently came out in favor of stricter gun control laws in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting, which took the lives of twenty children and six adults. Morgan berated a gun rights spokesman on his show, calling him a “stupid” and “dangerous man.” Perhaps Morgan’s response wasn’t the most cordial one. But it’s still his to make, and for us to accept or push aside, however legitimate we deem it to be. 
Yet, because of his comments, right wing gun supporters have posted a petition on ...

The spirit of the Second Amendment shouldn't allow for abuse of the right at the expense of others' livelihoods Following the horrendous tragedy that occurred in Connecticut, many people might say the following conversation is coming much too soon. But it’s a conversation that needs to be had, especially after the devastating, soul-shattering act that we witnessed on Friday. Bringing him to tears, President Barack Obama made one thing clear : “these children are our children,” and the families of those affected by gun violence are our families. We feel for them, pray for them -- and can only imagine what they’re going through, dread the thought of having to go through it ourselves. Yet throughout the day, the defense of Second Amendment rights was still prevalent , in conservative media as well as in social media. While pleas for stronger laws to protect future generations of children were being made, to possibly prevent future occurrences like these from happening again...

Governor's comments suggest the only thing stopping GOP is the economic impact of change Gov. Scott Walker says that he won’t sign a bill into law if it eliminates same-day voter registration. His reasoning behind his change of heart is financial: doing-away with the decades-old practice would cost the state more than $5 million initially , with additional costs of $2 million every two years after that. So while Walker’s decision to push aside the issue is a welcomed one, his reasoning is less than noble -- it’d be much better if Walker had changed his mind based on the importance of preserving democracy rather than concerns of its costs . 
Still, it seems that same-day voter registration is safe, at least for now. But that doesn’t mean that will always be the case. Indeed, Rep. Joel Kleefisch, the Wisconsin Assemblyman who has dedicated himself for years towards ending same-day registration , says he’s pressing on with finding a way to get rid of the democratically empow...

Governor fails to include constituents in his “conversations ” with them Gov. Scott Walker wants to talk to the people. He said so himself a week ago, when he announced his “Talk with Walker” tour :
 “I’m looking forward to talking with people around Wisconsin about what is important to them,” he said. “We are looking for bold ideas and real solutions to the problems facing our state.” It’s great that Walker has said he wants to talk to people. Unfortunately, it’s also untrue -- the so-called “Talk with Walker” tour doesn’t actually allow citizens to access the governor personally . Instead, Walker is visiting local businesses, allowing only those employees and business leaders the chance to have real access to the governor . Individuals who don’t share Walker’s views are disallowed from attending. So when Walker states that he “[wants] to have a conversation with the people of Wisconsin about the best ways to move our state forward,” he’s really saying that he doesn’t care ...

Conservative claims over our "republican" style of government misses the point completely “We’re not a democracy; we’re a republic.” 

I cannot tell you how many times I’ve heard that argument in the many debates I’ve had with others over the years. More often than not coming from the mouths (or keyboards) of conservatives, the line is meant to counter any argument made that the will of the people should be recognized, though usually only in times when liberals are in power. I’ve heard the defense of this line as follows: as a republic, we’re meant to protect the rights of the minorities over the tyranny of the majority. In other words, despite winning a majority number of representatives in our government, or in winning the main seat of government (as the case is this year with President Barack Obama retaining the White House), the people’s will should be thwarted because our government is a republic, designed to restrict the ability of those who won from exercising th...