The answer is Cognitive Dissonance; Self-Perception.
"Cognitive Dissonance theory best explains attitude change while Self-Perception theory best explains attitude formation."
In Cognitive Dissonance Theory, an individual seeks consistency in his beliefs and behaviors. When a conflict happens between the two, there's a need for change. For example, a man who smokes cannot quit smoking even if he knows the bad effects to his health. To reduce the discomfort, he will justify his behavior, convincing himself that to quit smoking will just make him gain weight, which is also a health risk.
On the other hand, the Self-Perception Theory assumes that our actions are self-revealing. We use our behavior to know what we feel. For example, you aren't sure if you really like the new student in your class. But you always greet her and have small talk with her, and even let her borrow some of your books. Your behavior towards your new classmate will make you think that you probably like her.
Explanation:
The Continental Army was formed by the Second Continental Congress after the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War by the ex-British colonies that became the United States of America. Established by a resolution of the Congress on June 14, 1775, it was created to coordinate the military efforts of the Thirteen Colonies in their revolt against the rule of Great Britain. The Continental Army was supplemented by local militias and volunteer troops that remained under control of the individual states or were otherwise independent. General George Washington was the commander-in-chief of the army throughout the war.
Every 10 years with the new U.S. Census, state legislatures set about drawing the boundaries of electoral districts in their states. The majority party in the legislature typically exerts its influence to draw districts that are favorable to itself. For instance, Republicans may observe that Democrats in their state are packed into a few urban pockets, and consequently, they will try to district them into as few groups as possible to give more representation to their Republican voters. Both major political parties are guilty of partisan gerrymandering, but the GOP spends far more money on the practice and often aims to disenfranchise minority voices.
The origin of the term "gerrymandering" is actually one of my favorite historical tidbits. Elbridge Gerry, then governor of Massachusetts, passed a law in 1812 that consolidated the Federalists into a handful of districts and gave disproportionate voice to the Democratic-Republicans. A political cartoon noted the districts' resemblance of a salamander (see picture below), and called it the "gerry-mander."
Many agree that partisan gerrymandering is a distasteful aspect of our democracy. This year, there have been a flurry of court rulings, including before the U.S. Supreme Court, examining the constitutionality of different voting maps that appear to be designed to disenfranchise minorities. The New York Times has done some excellent coverage that I highly recommend.
Right now (since 2009), the highest court of appeals in the UK, which has the English Westminster model, is the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. Before 2009 this function was fullfilled by the House of Lords.