North Korea's Cyberwarfare

According to Jang Se-yul, a person who had formerly worked for the North Korean government before defecting, the nation has an established squad for cyberattacks. This squad, called Bureau 121, conducts cyberattacks on any nation or group that North Korea considers their 'enemy.'  Jang believes that this group was behind the Sony attacks earlier this month, and that they have attacked before. South Korea had reported cyberattacks before, which was supposedly traced back to North Korea. 

People now realize that their views of North Korea are far different from how they really are. People see the country as a dictatorship wracked by poverty, but in fact, they at least have enough money to train these so-called 'cyber warriors.' 

It brings the question: what else is North Korea hiding? Maybe they are truly more advanced than we thought before, and that their threats aren't empty. Their nuclear threats may have no substance to them, but if they have the capability to bring an entertainment empire like Sony to its knees, who knows what they could attack next.

Cuba and US Relations Looking Good

Obama, with the help of Pope Francis, had worked towards peace with the country of Cuba. Since the revolution there almost 50 years ago, the United States had established an embargo with Cuba, restricting trade and travel. This came after government subcontractor Alan Gross's  release from Cuba after five years of being imprisoned there.
This also marks the end of a fifty-year dispute between the two nations, marked by tensions and restrictions since the beginnings of the Cold War. Obama had been speaking with Raul Castro for over an hour on the phone earlier this week, among the first communications the nations had in decades.
This is incredible, considering the long history between the United States and Cuba. Being able to get to the point where these two nations, of all nations, can work out peace agreements is definitely a good sign. Perhaps this will be the beginning of more diplomatic relations between us and Cuba. of course, it won't happen overnight, but any means of improvement is good.

Ex-Marine Murders 6

Bradley William Stone, a man who served in the US Marines until 2011 had murdered his ex-wife and five ex-in-laws in the suburbs of Philadelphia on Monday. He killed his ex-wife and her mother, grandmother and sister, as well as the sister's husband and 14-year-old daughter without a known motive.
He is currently at large, and his location is unknown due to the fact the police recovered his car and cell phone. All that is known that he is armed and dangerous. Schools and other buildings in the town are currently closed due to the fear of Stone still being in the area.
Why someone would do this is beyond me. There has to be some motive or event that sparked this, considering him and his wife divorced in 2009. What made him snap? We won't know until he is found, and even then, we may never truly know.

Sony Hack - North Korea Behind It?

In the past week, Sony Pictures had been hacked, resulting in over 100 terabytes of data being leaked to the public, including unreleased movies such as the Annie remake.
To put it into perspective, 100 terabytes could hold 360 million photos. This information leaked includes movies, private internal documents holding employees' personal info, memos, and information on employees' salaries.
This is a major hack, bringing the company down on its knees. Information exposed gives the company a bad name, such as the gender and race pay gap present within the company. 3800 employees are being protected against identity theft now because of their info being leaked.
Much of the evidence behind the attack suggests North Korea was behind it. For example:

• the malware used is similar to ones North Korea has used before
• the language of it is in Korean
• Sony's planning on releasing a comedy soon about a plot to kill leader Kim Jong Un

However, the North Korean government suggested they may have not been behind it, although this is unclear.

The statement didn't outright say the North Korean government was not responsible. But KCNA called North Korean involvement "a wild rumor" and the government suggested it couldn't be behind a cyberattack on "a country far across the ocean."

When Will It End?

Another day, another case where a police officer gets away with murder.

This time, it was father of six Eric Garner, who was killed by Officer Daniel Pantaleo on July 17th. He was accused of selling illegal cigarettes, and after 'resisting' arrest (verbally, not physically or threatening), Pantaleo placed him in an illegal chokehold until he had died from suffocation. Garner, who had asthma, said eleven times that he couldn't breathe, but the officer wouldn't let go.

The grand jury in this case also chose not to indict, even though the entire altercation was caught on video. Daniel Pantaleo did not receive any charges.

(disturbing content warning)

What is it going to take for justice in this nation? We either need to train our cops better, or reform the grand jury system. The system itself is inherently rigged when dealing with cases against police officers; as the prosecutor has to present evidence against a fellow colleague.

It is completely unfair for a police officer to not be charged when he not only killed someone who was not threatening him, but he also did it illegally, as chokeholds such as this are banned in the NYPD.

Body Cameras on Police Officers - Now Required?

With the recent wake of protests in Ferguson, along with recent callouts on police brutality, Obama responded by suggesting new standards on police uniforms, the main part being adding funding (to the tune of $273 million) to get body cameras on 50000 police officers across the nation.
This would provide video evidence in cases of police brutality, such as those of Michael Brown or Kajieme Powell. In cases like these, police and witness statements are often disputed; by having these cameras on an official there, it would definitely clear up misconceptions or confusion.

While this is a great idea, it won't help combat police brutality, especially in cases where racial profiling is involved. For example, in the case of Kajieme Powell, he was fatally shot by police in a St. Louis street, where a witness had recorded the entire altercation. Even though there was video evidence that the police used excessive force, the video wasn't considered in the case.

Perhaps having the cameras on police officers, without the ability to remove or turn them off would help more than a witness recording an altercation on their phone. Maybe not. We'd just have to wait and find out.

All We Want is Justice for Michael Brown

The Basic Facts:

• Officer Darren Wilson, a white police officer of Ferguson, MO, had pulled over black teenager Michael Brown and his friend Dorian Johnson on August 9th, 2014
• After an unknown altercation, Darren Wilson fired twelve shots towards Brown, seven of them hitting him and killing him
• On November 24th, the Grand Jury chose not to indict Darren Wilson. This means that:
• Darren Wilson will not be charged
• He can walk away free
• He got away with murdering an unarmed teenager because of 'fear'

That's the basic facts everyone agrees on when it comes to the Ferguson case. However, what the citizens of the city, along with the Grand Jury had to do is figure out what exactly happened that afternoon.

The Debate

The main source of debate is whether or not Michael had attacked Officer Wilson or not. According to Wilson's testimony, Brown had attacked him after he stopped him for walking in the middle of the road, getting a hold of the officer's gun. Wilson did not know about the supposed robbery happening at first; he pulled Brown and Johnson over for jaywalking. Wilson described a violent encounter, but his medical exam photos tell a different story.

The lack of violent injuries just don't match up with his story. You'd expect more bruising, perhaps more lacerations, but there is only one major bruise, and even then, it doesn't match his testimony. If he was in the driver's seat of the police car when Brown supposedly 'attacked' him, it would've been near impossible for Brown to strike the right side of his face from the driver's window.

According to witnesses, amongst those who testified, Brown had definitely run away from Wilson after being shot. Whether or not a violent encounter had occurred is up for debate, because two stories are currently circulating:

• Darren Wilson was attacked by Michael Brown and shot him in self defense
• Michael Brown was attacked by Wilson, who went after Brown

Even if Brown had attacked Wilson, the gun is a last resort; Wilson should've used mace or a taser to stun him before arresting him. Of course, he claimed in his testimony he couldn't reach his mace and that he wasn't comfortable carrying a taser, so he went for the gun, that he proceeded to use twelve times; twice in the car, ten outside of the car. Seven of these hit Brown.

Completely unnecessary. How he didn't at the least get charged with excessive force is beyond me.

To put it bluntly:

An unarmed black teenager was shot seven times by a white police officer, who got away with it. No justice was served.

Darren Wilson walks free, possibly a millionaire due to tax-exempt donations plus a six figure number for being interviewed by ABC.

Michael Brown is painted as a criminal and is demonized across the country.

This is the nation we live in.

Liberty and justice for all? No, only for the white man.

May Nolan Burch Rest in Peace

Nolan Burch, a college freshman at West Virginia University and a Canisius graduate, had passed away in what was described as a 'catastrophic medical emergency' Wednesday. He had pledged to join the university's Kappa Sigma fraternity; however, during his initiation, he was found unconscious around 11:50 PM Wednesday night when campus police were notified.

It was said that he was extremely excited about pledging to join the fraternity, and was prepared to do anything during his pledging; this included a " text to 120 fraternity brothers about what the weather would be like that day" at 5 AM every morning.

However, the party culture of college, and especially fraternities and sororities, had proven to be dangerous for the freshman. He was obviously caught up with the fraternity culture of the university, and was enthusiastic to become a fraternity brother. His death was most likely caused by heavy drinking, probably a part of his pledge, or due to pressure from his brothers.

It is truly unfortunate; however, we can learn from this. Being able to join a fraternity or sorority can be an amazing experience in college, but it obviously has its dangers. From hazing that still goes on, to intense pledges just to join, to the rampant underage drinking and excessive partying, it can be detrimental as well. Nolan was a great student and was eager to begin college life; unfortunately he had not considered the consequences of some of his actions.

May he rest in peace.

Tell TIME: Feminist Is Not A Bad Word

In a recent survey by TIME Magazine, the magazine asked what words should be 'banned' in 2015; this is an annual tradition for the magazine. The problem? Among slang terms such as 'bae', 'basic', and 'turnt' was an odd word to be included: feminist. The magazine asked "...when did it become a thing that every celebrity had to state their position on whether this word applies to them, like some politician declaring a party?", not considering the importance of such a word.

Since the poll came out, many news outlets and organizations, such as The Huffington Post and Planned Parenthood have come forward criticizing the magazine. Feminist itself is not slang, it is not 'trendy', it is the name of an active movement in order to help women and men have equal rights. A political movement shouldn't be reduced down to a word that should be banned. There's power behind words, having TIME put 'feminist' in this poll just takes away that power.

Since then, TIME has apologized, however:

TIME apologizes for the execution of this poll; the word ‘feminist’ should not have been included in a list of words to ban. While we meant to invite debate about some ways the word was used this year, that nuance was lost, and we regret that its inclusion has become a distraction from the important debate over equality and justice.

It still isn't enough, though. What needs to be realized is that feminism isn't a trend, it's a political movement.

Net Neutrality - Where Obama Stands

This article tells about the recent push by President Obama to the F.C.C in order to enforce tougher rules on net neutrality in order to prevent large companies from setting regulations on their internet services. Without these rules, paywalls may be able to be set up by the companies, where consumers would have to pay for access to certain websites. 
The article, titled Obama Asks F.C.C. to Adopt Tough Net Neutrality Rules, is accurate to what is being described. It's simple; Obama wants the F.C.C. to adopt tougher policies to prevent restricted access to the Internet. In writing this article, Edward Wyatt had supported his argument by providing evidence from numerous sources, such as interviews, debates, and open discussions by both Obama and Tom Wheeler, F.C.C. chairman.
Obama said that "a free and open Internet was as critical to Americans’ lives as electricity and telephone service and should be regulated like those utilities to protect consumers." This is of the utmost importance; denying someone the right to access the Internet, which contains quite possibly more information than any library or encyclopedia, is similar to denying telephone service because someone can't afford extra fees on top of their ISP's bill. One of the main arguments presented is the importance of the Internet. Today, it is one of the most important resources anyone can have. Money shouldn't rule this argument as it has been. 

I do wonder if, perhaps, this is fueled by a corporate greed and a desire for more wealth at the cost of consumers, or maybe those against net neutrality have some sort of reasoning behind restricting Internet access. I also wonder what Wheeler's new policies on net neutrality include. These could've been something for Wyatt to explore more. 

Hopefully, Obama pushing Wheeler may start to get policies on net neutrality in motion.

Democrats Lost, Republicans Take Control

The results are in: Republicans took seven new states, allowing them to gain control of the Senate, and due to that, Congress. The states they took were Montana, South Dakota, Arkansas, West Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado and Iowa.
While this is disappointing, considering the fact that the Republicans have had the strongest majority in Congress since World War II, it wasn't surprising; the race itself was an extremely difficult one for Democrats.

Between issues of money and unwanted support from Obama (which has been the main issue for Democrats to overcome), the race itself had been perhaps doomed from the start for Democrats.

While they definitely had more minority voters and more moderate voters (53% compared to Republican's 44%), it wasn't enough. Most white people (60%) voted Republican, along with 85% of conservatives. Both of these groups are the majority in the United States, so it would be expected they'd win.

As I said in the last post, what Democrats needed was more voters. They feel like that they don't need to vote when these elections are just as crucial as the presidential ones. It's truly disappointing seeing them lose, only to ask why, when it was their own fault they didn't vote.

Democrats May Unfortunately Lose

By looking at the current polls, it is definitely certain that Republicans will maintain their majority in the House of Representatives, along with taking the majority from the Democrats in the Senate. Even though the Democrats had support from people such as Obama and Hillary Clinton, it wasn't enough for the Democrats. In fact, it may have hurt them more than helped; Republicans spent their entire campaign focusing on the fact that Democrats supported Obama, even though most of them didn't want to associate with him.

According to the New York Times, the best way the Democrats can keep control of the Senate is if they win in Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, North Carolina, and New Hampshire, along with the 11 solid Democratic states. Even if they do this, it's most likely not going to happen; Republicans have a 70% chance of gaining control of the Senate.

Current polls show that Democrats could keep control of the Senate, but it is extremely unlikely and an event that I don't think will happen. Perhaps if more Democrats went out and voted during the midterms, the results would be different, but these voters feel as if it isn't necessary. Unfortunately, every election is important and Democrats need to vote more regardless of their confidence in their representatives and senators.

It's unfortunate, but Republicans will most likely regain control of both the Senate and the House.

Numbers (Surprisingly) Looking Good for Democrats

In numerous states, early voting numbers have been counted already. In states where these numbers have been counted, up to 20% of the people who voted did not vote in the last midterm election. More of these voters are Democrat (39%), while less are Republican (30%). This is showing that the last minute attempts to gain the Democrats' attention had somewhat paid off. Normally, Democrats vote less during the midterms and more during presidential elections, but this trend doesn't seem to be happening this year.

While this doesn't mean the Democrats are going to win more elections, as this is just preliminary, it does provide some sense of hope for those who are concerned about the Democrat's role in the midterms. There is still a chance the Democrats can maintain their majority in the Senate, which is their main concern this election season.

Where's all the money coming from?

Considering how the total election spending this year amounted to almost $4 billion, and Democrats alone spent $1.76 billion, there is a lot of questions as to where the money came from. This chart shows spending in past elections, along with a projected spending for the 2014 elections.

This also includes undisclosed spending, referred to as 'dark money'. Dark money is mostly donations from sources that aren't revealed to the public. 

A lot of Democratic money comes from President Obama's fundraising; he has done about 50 fundraisers this year to gain money for the midterm elections. This is an interesting turn, considering how Democrats don't want to be associated with him.

Why Democrats need to step up their game

As it is looking like the Democrats will lose the majority in the Senate, causing Republicans to control the White House, their strategies need to be stronger and as efficient as possible if they want to keep the Senate majority. The Democrats especially need to defend and win the Senate races in battleground states (Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and North Carolina) in order to achieve this. These seven states in particular are important because they are currently Democratic, but are also toss-ups, meaning the states have a chance of becoming Republican.
Another key point is the Democrats attempting to disassociate themselves with President Obama. Since his approval rating is currently at 41.2%, and he has been heavily criticized, many voters feel as if the Democrats in Congress will end up doing the same things as he did. The Democratic party is already attempting to do this by stating how Obama is 'irrelevant' to their own elections, instead choosing to rely on Bill and Hillary Clinton for support. Hopefully by doing this, they may be able to maintain majority in the Senate, regardless of the grim chances some news networks have predicted (such as the Washington Post's 91% chance of the GOP taking over the Senate).
We just have to wait and vote.

Obama's Response

President Barack Obama had discussed midterm elections on Rev. Al Sharpton's radio show, where he said he recognizes how the Democratic Party is distancing themselves from him. 
“This isn’t about my feelings being hurt,” he said. “These are folks who are strong allies and supporters of me and I tell them, ‘You know what? You do what you need to do to win. I will be responsible for making sure that our voters turn out.'” (source: http://newsone.com/3064801/president-obama-midterm-voter-turnout-democrats-blacks/)
Regardless, he also said that things would still be fine for the party during elections.

(source: http://www.cnbc.com/id/102063107)

During their elections, Democratic candidates are trying their best to disassociate from the President, due to his falling approval rating and recent scandals involving the government. Senators are currently saying that him trying to aid Democratic candidates will do more harm than good, as Republicans are using anything Obama does as fuel for their own elections, as Senator Joe Manchin said. (source: http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2014-10-21/republicans-pounce-on-obamas)

Updates on Midterms: Hillary Clinton's Response

Democrat Hillary Clinton has recently been campaigning in order to help improve the Democrats' chances at the midterm elections. She is encouraging Democrats to vote this election, even though it seems as if the party is going to lose the majority in the Senate.
She has also spent time working with Democrats running for House and Senate seats, helping them in their own campaigns in the process.
According to Ange-Marie Hancock, who is a professor at University of Southern California, “it is important because Clinton is incredibly popular among target voters who are less likely to turn out during midterm elections — young people, African American and Latino voters.”
Her main focus has been working to keep the Senate majority with the Democrats, as they are at risk of losing the majority this election. Having an influential leader such as herself (who previously served as First Lady under Clinton, along with being a former Secretary of State and Senator) is extremely helpful to the falling Democratic party, especially when approval ratings for Obama (another Democrat) is going down, even within the party.
(source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-is-a-bright-spot-on-a-gloomy-democratic-election-landscape/2014/10/20/f86cb1b6-5862-11e4-bd61-346aee66ba29_story.html)

Democratic Party - A Basic Definition

Before going into the Democratic Party's role in midterm elections, a history of the party and its goals are necessary.