The New President Of The United States

New media is a less traditional version of media resulting from the digitization of almost everything. Compared to its predecessor, new media is instantaneous, interactive, and universally accessible. The largest aspect of new media is social media. It’s role in today’s media environment presents an interesting paradox. On one hand, social media is rather limiting. It is incredibly easy to tailor one’s online experience to their personal beliefs and perspective. At the same time, social media presents the opportunity to connect with the world at large. To say that new media allows for one but the not the other would be incorrect.

On Trump’s rhetoric of this campaign season, particularly in calling for a ban of Muslims from entering this country, Rubio was asked if this has increased in Islamophobia. “No one should be discriminated in America against their religion or faith,” Rubio responded. “Bottom line is there are millions of patriotic Muslim Americans. Our issue is not with patriotic Muslim Americans, it is with radical Islam.”

“Why do I say this?” one may ask. Well, the issues of national security and terrorism have been very critical problems in our nation in the past years, and much of this terrorism can be attributed to ISIS, a radical Islamist terrorist group. Unfortunately, a bigoted, hypocritical, egregious republican nominee named Donald Trump decided to propose a ban on all Muslims that enter our country. Even more distressing, however, is the fact that Donald Trump has nearly 50% of the nation’s support in his racist ideals and has inspired heated racism against the Muslim people in our own country, a country that is supposed to uphold morally-sound constitutional rights of freedom for every religion.

Bush (2008), Supreme Court decision decided that foreigners, even those suspected of terrorist acts, are entitled to the same Constitutional rights as United States citizens are ("BOUMEDIENE v. BUSH."). So, if religious tests were included in the Constitution for the Founding Fathers fear of potentially establishing a church of state, we must discern whether a religious test on refugees would violate the establishment. The Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), established a three test precedent for evaluating what infringes upon the rights granted in the Establishment clause. “First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not foster ‘an excessive government entanglement with religion.’” ("Lemon v. Kurtzman."). A religious test determining the admittance procedure on immigrants and refugees, would not pass the Lemmon test, and would thus be in violation of the Constitution. For example, President Trump’s Travel Ban states that it will, “prioritize refugees’ claims made by individuals on the basis of religious persecution, provided that the religion of that individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality” (Exec.). Considering that none of the countries listed in Trump’s “Muslim Ban”, have not orchestrated any pernicious terroristic attacks, since 1975, the Executive Order has scant evidence to support these

Back in 2015, Republican Party nominee Trump made his opinion known about his proposals to temporarily ban immigration in the United States. In a press release statement, Trump called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on." I see what Trump reasoning is and I think it could be reasonable, but I believe it is still unconstitutional. The Seattle federal judge that suspended Trump’s order, Gordon, states that “the court concludes that the government’s reasons, as provided in the [executive order], are facially legitimate are bona fide but unconstitutional.” I am somewhat in agreement about the ban being reasonable, but you can not say that people from a religion are considered “terrorist” or associate a religion with “terrorist” or terrorism, which Trump is doing. However, although he has a good reasoning it is not enough, because a good purpose doesn’t make anything

It is unconstitutional. Donald Trump is attacking the Muslims. There are many Muslims in the US and they have done no harm. He is blaming them and trying to make them leave. This like how Hitler and the Jews. Where Hitler discriminated and blamed the jews and try to get rid of them. This is somewhat similar because Donald Trump is picking on one race and discriminating them and blaming them. Trump is saying that every Muslim is bad.

However, all the terrorist group that were mentioned also operate in multiple non banned countries, also like was stated earlier the majority of terrorist attacks in the U.S are carried out by american citizens many of which aren't even muslim jihadist. Once again this clearly display how the Trump Administration is not considering easily accessible fact before sign orders that affect thousands of Americans and millions of others. Instead of banning people from muslim country President Trump should be using resources to shut down jihadist websites that radicalize U.S citizens terrorist who cause the most damage and and trying to stop terror attacks by non muslims before they happen once again supporting the point that Trump’s immigration plan is inadequate to protect Americans from terror

Rallies, riots, and protests have been springing up even outside of the U.S. Former president Barack Obama has already spoken out against the immigration ban recently put into place. “In his final official speech as President, he spoke about the important role of citizen[s] and how all Americans have a responsibility to be guardians of our democracy― not just during an election but every day,” said Obama’s spokesman Kevin Lewis, quoted in a 2017 NPR article. Not only that, but according to a 2017 New York Times article, the immigration ban is illegal. Over 50 years ago, Congress outlawed discrimination against immigrants based on national origin. In 1924, after the troubles relating to the Asiatic Barred Zone, Congress created a comprehensive “national-origins system.” Trump, in defense, quoted a 1952 law allowing the president the ability to “suspend the entry” of “any class of aliens,” which was restricted in 1965, something our president should know if he’s going to run the country for four years. Donald Trump, by doing this, is violating the beliefs of the Philosophes, i.e. Voltaire, Rousseau, and Locke. He does so by ignoring religious tolerance, and by violating the Constitution and natural rights. Donald Trump is not only lacking knowledge on the Constitution and American laws, but he is also putting out country at risk by placing this ban in order. On the contrary, Trump is doing so with best

The latest hot topic when it comes to the Republican candidates for the presidential election is Muslims. From Donald Trump saying we have a “Muslim problem”, to Ben Carson saying Muslims are unfit for office, the attack on Muslims has been a big subject. In this New York Times editorial “The Republican Attack on Muslims”, the author talks about how recently the Republicans were not the nicest when it comes to the Muslim community. Recently, Donald Trump has hinted towards his dislike for Muslims. In a recent interview, the interviewer stated that “we have a problem in this country, it’s called Muslims”, and that our President (who is an American-born Christian) is also a Muslim. When the interviewer asked Mr. Trump when we would get rid of them, he said “We’re going to be looking into that.” Donald Trump has also stated that he thinks Muslims were behind the World Trade Center attacks, which is not true.

On January 2017 the new president of the United States Donald Trump signed the order to ban immigrants, travelers, and even green card holders who were born in one of the following seven Middle Eastern countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen, specifically Muslims and Syrians. According to what President Trump was saying, this order is made for the safety of the country, and to limit what is called the “Foreign Terrorism” inside the United States. People who agree with this law believe that banning believers of a specific faith and refugees entering the United State will make them safer. The law states that these seven countries’ citizens are not allowed to enter the United States for 90 days, starting from the day

The travel ban is an executive order which was put into place by President Donald Trump’s administration on January 27th, 2017. The order was put into place for our national security to “protect the nation from foreign terrorist entry into the United States.” This measure banned travel into the U.S. for 90 days from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. This obviously sparked an outcry from social media, which caused a divide among Americans. With a show of hands, how many of you think that the travel ban is actually a ban on Muslim refugees and that it is racist. Recent polls show that 57% of Americans favor the temporary ban while 33% are opposed to it, and 10% are still undecided. Racism, fascism, and Islamophobia; these words have all taunted supporters of President Trump and the travel ban. The one thing people don’t realize is that the travel ban isn’t banning Muslims from America. Who in the room can name the top 5 countries with the most Muslims. They are Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. Not one of these countries are listed in the ban. This ban is only for only ninety days, and is aimed at countries who have sent a large contingency of terrorists to the U.S. The countries selected have active terrorist training camps, and Trump is not the individual who selected the countries on the list. These countries are unstable, with no reliable vetting procedures. We shouldn’t admit people until they can meet our security screening standards.

On Facebook, I sought out opinions on this social justice issue by searching through public postings for the hashtags #travelban, #muslimban, #nobannowall, #refugees, #Americafirst, and #buildthewall. The vast majority of views presented by those using these hashtags were against the ban. One common theme held by those against the ban is that it was discriminatory. By adding Venezuela and North Korea to the list, the social media opinion is that Trump is trying to distract from it being a racist ban targeting Muslims. For example, Aram Shahinfard (2017) states in his Facebook update, “So he added a few more countries to make it a not-muslim ban? It is still not acceptable!” His Facebook friend,

The presence of Donald Trump as he runs for president in the United States and proposes a ban on the entrance of Muslims into the country presents a palpable threat to peace and security, not just of the Unites States but the whole world. His discriminatory stance has caused a spike against Muslims and threaten to drown any anti-racist rhetoric and destroy the multiculturalism that we have strived so long to establish. The anti-Islam protests do one thing and one thing only, and that’s to provide an over whelming reason for young Muslims to turn to another hope. To turn to some place that will accept you for who you. A place that fights to resist the evil and to resist the hate that so many young Muslims feel every single

Information and entertainment today are usually spread through the development of technology. Due to this, various medias enable us to give and receive information. Media can be divided into traditional media and new media (Christian, 2014). While it is easy to pinpoint the differences of the two medias, there are also some similarities that tie both medias together.

There are two types of media, and each type has his way to broadcast the information. “These two types are traditional and-social” (Hayles K., 2004). Traditional media includes: radio, magazines, newspapers, television, different publications and so on. Social media is the process of the informational interchange. In recent years, social media became part of everybody’s life. People exchange the information, opinions, news everywhere: in blogs, social networks, forums, etc. People became sources to each other. The importance of social media is rising extremely.