Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

discocrisco01

discocrisco01's Journal
discocrisco01's Journal
February 12, 2012

I Do Not Believe That Unpaid Internships Are In Embrassment

Imagined if you were spent significant in prison, got a DUI, had a bad employment records, and than subsequently decided to get a new career. How you are get a job without good references?

The key thing for people in the subject cases is that unpaid internship goes a long way to land your next job. You are not interested in the money. You interested in the reference and

Imagine if you had a major drinking problem, got a DUI, and had significant problems with a prior employer. Wouldn't you rather to get an unpaid internship to get a good reference and show that your rehabilitation goes fine.

These are people where unpaid internships for the best things. It is not good for people who have no criminal background or no prior issues with employers. Paid internships should be given in most cases, except where an unpaid internship is designed for rehabilitation for a major drug and alcohol program and people with prior felonies especially serious felonies such as robbery, drug-dealing, sexual abuse, or first/second degree murder (had they served at least 25-30 years in prison, live a spiritual lifestyle, and do not poet a threat to public safety).

I have a DUI and prior issues with last employer so I need unpaid internship, but most college students do not deserve this and so there should be a limitation on the use of unpaid internships unless it is the case that I describe above.

February 10, 2012

The Rich Rob The Poor

February 10, 2012

Republicans And Abortion


February 10, 2012

Court: Norway's Breivik to undergo constant psychiatric scrutiny

Oslo, Norway (CNN) -- A Norwegian court ordered Anders Behring Breivik, charged with killing 77 people last July, to undergo a month-long psychiatric evaluation as experts seek to determine his mental state ahead of a trial.
Breivik is accused of killing eight people in a bomb attack in Oslo and 69 more in a gun rampage on nearby Utoya Island on July 22. It was the deadliest attack on Norwegian soil since World War II.
Two court-appointed psychiatric experts recommended that Breivik should spend four weeks under 24-hour psychiatric monitoring so the court can get the fullest possible picture of his behavior, according to court documents released Friday.
He should be kept away from other patients but will still have to interact with psychiatric staff, the documents say. The observation will be carried out in facilities at Ila Prison, where he is being held at

Read more at http://edition.cnn.com/2012/02/10/world/europe/norway-breivik-shooting/

February 10, 2012

So Conservatives Think Obama Is GOing

According to Eric Ericson, it look likes the Republicans to lose the general election. From the Washington Examiner



Republicans have little chance of defeating President Obama this year and may be better off focusing their efforts on state and congressional elections in November, thousands of conservative activists were told as they kicked off a three-day conference in D.C. Thursday.

"Republicans have dropped the ball on telling the story about Barack Obama," said Erick Erickson, editor of RedState.com, an influential conservative blog. "I hate to be pessimistic about an election we should win, but it seems like we are setting ourselves up to lose if the economy improves."

Erickson told the Conservative Political Action Conference that Republicans should shift their energy -- and money -- away from a presidential contest in which Republicans are conflicted about the candidates. Instead, he said the party should focus on winning elections further down the ballot.

"We can't just focus on the White House," Erickson said. "The danger for 2012 is if we run with electability instead of big ideas for reform and then suddenly the top of the ticket doesn't look that electable."

Other speakers at the CPAC confab warned that nominating a presidential contender who doesn't have the backing of the party's conservative wing would, in the words of one, be "suicide for the Republican Party."

Still, the party's on-again, off-again front-runner, Mitt Romney, is failing to generate much enthusiasm among conservatives, pollster Scott Rasmussen said. That has led to a series of mercurial surges by more conservative contenders who, because they have trouble attracting broader support, faded as quickly as they rose. Three have already been forced out of the race. Three others continue to beat up on Romney, with former Sen. Rick Santorum eclipsing Romney on Tuesday after winning nominating contests in Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri.


I think Eric Erickson is dead on. I believe that the Democrats are going to lose seats in the House And Senate , but the Republicans will not win the White House. If the Republicans win both houses, expect less gridlock in Congress and that the House and Senate will move quicker to pass Republican legisilation.

The only problem about the Republicans is the rightward shift of the party instead of more of a shift to the middle. If the party governed from a center right perspective instead of hardcore Tea Party ideology, expect Obama to pass significant conservative legislation that would be water-down but still would advance the right-wing agenda even further. If it tea-party ideology, expect gridlock on the hill and Obama is not going to cave. Obama will think that the Dems would significant chances to 2014 to huge gains in House and Senate because the Republicans have prove that hard-core Republican ideology has result in a four years of gridlock.

I do not think it is intent of the right to wreck all of the social program into the ground, but they are willing to deal significant damage to the social safety net especially if they elect moderate right-wingers. Electing the tea party nuts will prevent them from getting anything accomplished because the Dems can take down in the Republicans in 2014. Four years of Congressional gridlock compared to the Congress of 2009-2010 is something that even a Superpac cannot done.

I think the if the Republicans focus on moderate, center-right message like Reagan did, they can go far but trying to very hard-core rightist appeal will not work and it cost them big time in the next election cycle.

Profile Information

Member since: Fri Jun 5, 2009, 12:38 AM
Number of posts: 1,666
Latest Discussions»discocrisco01's Journal