"Mommy...Daddy...it's Christmas." I slowly walk over to my mom's side of the bed to shake her awake. "C'mon Mommy, we have to go open presents." I whisper. "Elizabeth, it's 5:30 am, can you go back to bed please for another, oh I don't know, two hours?" My mom says groggily. As a stubborn four year old, I didn't take to this question well and I needed a way to convince my parents that we needed to get up now instead of eight. "Mommy, let's get up, it's Chwist-mas!" My three year old sister comes sprinting into my parent's bedroom, her hair standing up in back. She takes a running start and leaps onto the bed, landing on my dad's legs. "What the-- Caroline!" my dad yells out in pain, trying to push my sister off. He began to mumble words, that at the time, did not mean anything to me and weren't seen as offensive at all. "Caroline and Elizabeth go back to bed now or I'm canceling Christmas." my mom yelled suddenly grabbing our attention. When my mom yells, you know that she means business and the idea of canceling Christmas was not even an option. Caroline and I started to walk back to our bedroom but before we could get there my four month old brother woke up screaming and crying.
We all made our way to Collin's room. "Caroline and Elizabeth go to your room now!" My dad said as he started to push us towards our room. "Does this mean Christmas is cancelled?" I asked, on the verge of crying. I knew my dad wouldn't be able to resist "the face." He looked at me for a moment and contemplated closing the door. "No Elizabeth." He said smiling "Come here." We all walked to Collin's room where my mom was trying to get him back to sleep by holding and rocking him. I sat on the floor quietly while Caroline went over to the book shelf to to grab Twas the Night Before Christmas. She opened the book and I could hear her trying to sound out the words. My dad sat down next to her and put in his lap, trying to help her read the book. I walked over and sat down next to him, looking at the pictures and listening to Caroline's attempts to read. As we kept reading, Collin stopped crying and my mom actually pulled out a couple of other Christmas books and we read those.
We ended up falling back asleep on my brother's floor until 8:30 a.m. He woke up first, but ready to actually get up this time. This might seem like a strange Christmas memory but it's my favorite because we created traditions that. Whether my parents like to admit it or not, they always looked forward to us waking up early and running into their room. For a while, we read Christmas stories before opening presents. Now that we're teenagers, we don't wake up at the crack of dawn but we still enjoy sitting in each other's rooms talking about these memories before we go downstairs.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Bush = Broken Promises
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15654769/ns/politics-political_cartoons/t/week-political-cartoons/
Too often, politicians and congressmen make promises that they can't or don't intend to follow through on. With these promises, they offer a temporary solution to a long term problem. One of the problems this country has faced for the past ten years is the war on terrorism. Bush assumed office in 2000 and soon had to deal with the crisis of 9/11. In response to the attacks Bush sent troops over to the Middle East in order to prevent any future attacks from coming to fruition. Constantly, Bush kept saying how he would take the troops out of Iraq and Iran by Christmas or in a year of the last promise. Finally after ten years, all troops in Iraq will be home for Christmas this year, something Obama said he would be able to do during his presidency.
In Adam Zygus's cartoon, Bush is in the background standing behind a podium saying "Major Combat Operations in Iraq have ended." I huge pencil is drawn next to the speaking bubble, dotting the period at the end of Bush's statement. On the side of the pencil the date "Dec. 15, 2011" is displayed. Bush's statement is supposed to represent all the false promises he made and what he was not able to accomplish during his time in office. Bush is also wearing an air suit that indicates he's been over to Iraq, meaning he should have obtained an update on the troops. This represents that Bush just wanted to appeal to the public when in fact he knew that the troops were not going to be coming home. In the bubble the date "May 1, 2003" is written and is used as a contrast between the date Dec. 15, 2011. This shows that it took eight years in order for the operations in Iraq to end instead of three years.
One of the techniques that Zygus uses is his placement of certain features in the cartoon. He places Bush in the background emphasizing the fact that Bush's remarks are part of the past, that he is no longer president. There's also a clear contrast between dates meaning that both are significantly different. May 3 is in the springtime heading towards summer, which for most families, is a time where they'll be taking vacations together. December 15 is ten days before Christmas, another event where families will be spending time together. Many of the people serving in the military are a part of these families and due to the fact that time kept elapsing, they didn't get to see them. Zygus also uses an actual quote which is supposed to make people think about the flaws that Bush had in his presidency. Bush would give information to the public that he thought they wanted to hear, not the information that they needed to hear.
For many years, we struggled with taking the troops out of the Middle East and finally we've been able to get them out of Iraq. Obama has made it possible for this to happen and that's a huge contrast between him and Bush. This cartoon deals with the issue of the amount of time the troops have spent over in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan. While Americans would like to protect themselves from terrorists, they also need to think about those who are currently defending. Zygus seems to support that the troops need to be taken out of the Middle East because of Obama's presidency. Zygus could be a liberal due to the fact that they do not believe that America should be using violence as a means to fight terrorism. But the main message is not about the troops but about the lies that Americans have heard repeatedly about the war over in Iraq. Bush did not handle the war well and it is reflected in Zygus's cartoon. By emphasizing the past and present conditions of the war, Zygus is able to help Americans see what a difference eight years makes and how much more information we've obtained about the war.
Too often, politicians and congressmen make promises that they can't or don't intend to follow through on. With these promises, they offer a temporary solution to a long term problem. One of the problems this country has faced for the past ten years is the war on terrorism. Bush assumed office in 2000 and soon had to deal with the crisis of 9/11. In response to the attacks Bush sent troops over to the Middle East in order to prevent any future attacks from coming to fruition. Constantly, Bush kept saying how he would take the troops out of Iraq and Iran by Christmas or in a year of the last promise. Finally after ten years, all troops in Iraq will be home for Christmas this year, something Obama said he would be able to do during his presidency.
In Adam Zygus's cartoon, Bush is in the background standing behind a podium saying "Major Combat Operations in Iraq have ended." I huge pencil is drawn next to the speaking bubble, dotting the period at the end of Bush's statement. On the side of the pencil the date "Dec. 15, 2011" is displayed. Bush's statement is supposed to represent all the false promises he made and what he was not able to accomplish during his time in office. Bush is also wearing an air suit that indicates he's been over to Iraq, meaning he should have obtained an update on the troops. This represents that Bush just wanted to appeal to the public when in fact he knew that the troops were not going to be coming home. In the bubble the date "May 1, 2003" is written and is used as a contrast between the date Dec. 15, 2011. This shows that it took eight years in order for the operations in Iraq to end instead of three years.
One of the techniques that Zygus uses is his placement of certain features in the cartoon. He places Bush in the background emphasizing the fact that Bush's remarks are part of the past, that he is no longer president. There's also a clear contrast between dates meaning that both are significantly different. May 3 is in the springtime heading towards summer, which for most families, is a time where they'll be taking vacations together. December 15 is ten days before Christmas, another event where families will be spending time together. Many of the people serving in the military are a part of these families and due to the fact that time kept elapsing, they didn't get to see them. Zygus also uses an actual quote which is supposed to make people think about the flaws that Bush had in his presidency. Bush would give information to the public that he thought they wanted to hear, not the information that they needed to hear.
For many years, we struggled with taking the troops out of the Middle East and finally we've been able to get them out of Iraq. Obama has made it possible for this to happen and that's a huge contrast between him and Bush. This cartoon deals with the issue of the amount of time the troops have spent over in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan. While Americans would like to protect themselves from terrorists, they also need to think about those who are currently defending. Zygus seems to support that the troops need to be taken out of the Middle East because of Obama's presidency. Zygus could be a liberal due to the fact that they do not believe that America should be using violence as a means to fight terrorism. But the main message is not about the troops but about the lies that Americans have heard repeatedly about the war over in Iraq. Bush did not handle the war well and it is reflected in Zygus's cartoon. By emphasizing the past and present conditions of the war, Zygus is able to help Americans see what a difference eight years makes and how much more information we've obtained about the war.
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Answer to Question of the Week #3
Obama's presidency has been interesting to watch for the past three years. He came into office as a man with little experience in contrast to his opponent, John McCain. People have been able to see changes like the Health Care Bill or the Jobs Plan. Still, Obama's approval remains split. While 42% of Americans believe Obama has a decent Jobs Plan, 51% don't. There's no clear majority here, so it shows that Obama is not completely out of favor or in favor. It just means that it will be hard to predict whether or not he will win the presidency this year.
Back in September 2011, Gallup took a poll pertaining to how Obama has done compared to Bush. More Americans were inclined to say that Obama is better (43%) rather than worse (34%) and 22% seeing know difference between Bush and Obama. But compared to Bill Clinton, who, like Obama, is a Democrat, few people think that Obama has done better (12%) than Clinton. Unlike Obama, Clinton came into office with a lot more experience, knowing what policies he wanted to implement. Decisiveness is a key trait as a leader and Obama's approval ratings have dropped in those respects. In March 2011, Gallup's poll displayed Americans' view of Obama as a strong leader had dropped by 7% from April 2009. Overall, between understanding American's problems and sharing their values, Obama is at 21% decline.
As far as parties go, Obama is particularly popular with the Democratic party and only partially with the Republican party. 83% of Democrats feel Obama shares their values while a mere 18% of Republicans do. Surprisingly, Obama is split with Independents. 47% of Independents feel Obama shares their values which is slightly under 50%. If these polls are correct, Obama will probably be relying on the Democrats and Independents this year to reelect him as president.
It's hard to say at this point whether or not Obama has a strong chance of being reelected as president. Unfortunately over the past year, Obama's personality traits have trended downward meaning he is not connecting with the public. As president, the goal is to lead while still staying on base with Americans and that shouldn't be a huge task for Obama. This next year will test Obama to see whether or not he can raise ratings in the polls and be reelected to represent America once again.
Back in September 2011, Gallup took a poll pertaining to how Obama has done compared to Bush. More Americans were inclined to say that Obama is better (43%) rather than worse (34%) and 22% seeing know difference between Bush and Obama. But compared to Bill Clinton, who, like Obama, is a Democrat, few people think that Obama has done better (12%) than Clinton. Unlike Obama, Clinton came into office with a lot more experience, knowing what policies he wanted to implement. Decisiveness is a key trait as a leader and Obama's approval ratings have dropped in those respects. In March 2011, Gallup's poll displayed Americans' view of Obama as a strong leader had dropped by 7% from April 2009. Overall, between understanding American's problems and sharing their values, Obama is at 21% decline.
As far as parties go, Obama is particularly popular with the Democratic party and only partially with the Republican party. 83% of Democrats feel Obama shares their values while a mere 18% of Republicans do. Surprisingly, Obama is split with Independents. 47% of Independents feel Obama shares their values which is slightly under 50%. If these polls are correct, Obama will probably be relying on the Democrats and Independents this year to reelect him as president.
It's hard to say at this point whether or not Obama has a strong chance of being reelected as president. Unfortunately over the past year, Obama's personality traits have trended downward meaning he is not connecting with the public. As president, the goal is to lead while still staying on base with Americans and that shouldn't be a huge task for Obama. This next year will test Obama to see whether or not he can raise ratings in the polls and be reelected to represent America once again.
Is Wall Street Destroying the Dream?
http://www.uclick.com/client/nyt/bs/
Wall Street is known for it's immense amount of wealth and billionaires whom roam the streets. They're are also known for the lack of empathy not only towards the lower class but also the middle class. In Ben Sargent's political cartoon, a milk carton sits in the trash can displaying the words "Missing: Middle Class American Dream." The milk carton is something everyone can relate to because in the past, people have used them to publicize that someone is missing. This time though, it's publicizing that the American Dream is missing. This means that is is slowly disappearing as big businesses on Wall Street take over. Sargent's cartoon also illustrates a street sign that says in prominent letters "Wall Street." This is meant to symbolize that Wall Street is a a huge contributor to the elite's high status. When it comes to money, they dominate, and they're proud of it. The sign is placed above the trash can representing how Wall Street looks down upon the middle class and, like garbage, has no problem with letting go of the middle class.
One of the techniques that Ben Sargent uses is his placement of words. By placing the sign in the upper left hand corner, it catches the reader's attention immediately. The letters on the sign are thick and large to represent the reign that Wall Street has over society. This is supposed to make the reader think about the power that Wall Street has and how it's effected them and their lives. The reader's eye is then drawn to the trash can next, which is purposefully placed below the sign to emphasize anyone who does not have Wall Street status is considered "garbage." This is supposed to make the reader feel frustrated about the situations on Wall Street and fight against the elites of society.
Another technique Sargent uses is Ridicule. By placing the the "Middle Class American Dream" in the garbage, it emphasizes that it has become irrelevant to the elites. This is placing blame on Wall Street for their dominance over society and how it's become an issue. This issue has been publicized for weeks on the news, showcasing all the protests and riots that have been going on. The middle class makes up a huge part of America and people are fighting in order to keep this class around. Wall Street is the epitome of the Elitist Theory and that's not what America should stand for.
Sargent has a great point: the American Dream is missing. People have become hyper focused on who's holding the power rather than realizing that they can strive to accomplish the American Dream just like those on Wall Street. They do have an incredible amount of power but in order to take it out of their hands, people need to start working towards the American Dream again. Ben Sargent is probably a liberal due to the fact that he thinks the middle class is an important factor in society. Everyone should be well represented and most liberals believe that people can work towards wealth if they make the conscience decision to do so. Wall Street cannot keep people from working for what they want and they can stand up to the elites to start accomplishing the American Dream.
Wall Street is known for it's immense amount of wealth and billionaires whom roam the streets. They're are also known for the lack of empathy not only towards the lower class but also the middle class. In Ben Sargent's political cartoon, a milk carton sits in the trash can displaying the words "Missing: Middle Class American Dream." The milk carton is something everyone can relate to because in the past, people have used them to publicize that someone is missing. This time though, it's publicizing that the American Dream is missing. This means that is is slowly disappearing as big businesses on Wall Street take over. Sargent's cartoon also illustrates a street sign that says in prominent letters "Wall Street." This is meant to symbolize that Wall Street is a a huge contributor to the elite's high status. When it comes to money, they dominate, and they're proud of it. The sign is placed above the trash can representing how Wall Street looks down upon the middle class and, like garbage, has no problem with letting go of the middle class.
One of the techniques that Ben Sargent uses is his placement of words. By placing the sign in the upper left hand corner, it catches the reader's attention immediately. The letters on the sign are thick and large to represent the reign that Wall Street has over society. This is supposed to make the reader think about the power that Wall Street has and how it's effected them and their lives. The reader's eye is then drawn to the trash can next, which is purposefully placed below the sign to emphasize anyone who does not have Wall Street status is considered "garbage." This is supposed to make the reader feel frustrated about the situations on Wall Street and fight against the elites of society.
Another technique Sargent uses is Ridicule. By placing the the "Middle Class American Dream" in the garbage, it emphasizes that it has become irrelevant to the elites. This is placing blame on Wall Street for their dominance over society and how it's become an issue. This issue has been publicized for weeks on the news, showcasing all the protests and riots that have been going on. The middle class makes up a huge part of America and people are fighting in order to keep this class around. Wall Street is the epitome of the Elitist Theory and that's not what America should stand for.
Sargent has a great point: the American Dream is missing. People have become hyper focused on who's holding the power rather than realizing that they can strive to accomplish the American Dream just like those on Wall Street. They do have an incredible amount of power but in order to take it out of their hands, people need to start working towards the American Dream again. Ben Sargent is probably a liberal due to the fact that he thinks the middle class is an important factor in society. Everyone should be well represented and most liberals believe that people can work towards wealth if they make the conscience decision to do so. Wall Street cannot keep people from working for what they want and they can stand up to the elites to start accomplishing the American Dream.
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Answer to Question #2
There's only one GOP Candidate that I support right now and that's Mitt Romney. While I am a Democrat, Romney has caught my attention by displaying his amount of understanding and flexibility towards certain issues. For example, his stance on abortion. While most Republicans would tend to be against abortion, Mitt Romney seems to support the woman's right to choose and make her own decision. Men tend to be Republicans but this stance could help him gain more votes from women who tend to be Democrats.
Another reason why Romney has the potential to win is due to his candidates lack of information and presence. Unlike his competitors, Romney has a clean slate. He has done anything disastrous or been found guilty of a crime. Herman Cain will probably suffer due to the charges brought against him but not Romney. And while Perry has failed to show up for a few debates, Romney has not. This shows that Romney is engaged solely in politics and strives to keep a clean record not only for himself but for the people that will ultimately decide whether or not he will be elected: the people. Romney has set the bar high for his competitors and most likely they won't be able to reach it.
While Romney has not done anything terrible, he has shown that he waffles on important issues like Gay Rights and Abortion. When he was Senator Massachusetts, he made it clear during his campaign that women should have the right to decide if they want an abortion. Once he was elected, he changed his stance, making it evident that he was never for abortion in the first place. Romney also did the same thing for gay rights in which he told people that homosexual individuals should have these rights. But once he took office, he took back his words, saying that he was against gay rights. People are a bit confused as to where Romney stands and would like a straight answer.
Romney could also lose not only because of his lack of decisiveness but also because he appears to be a hypocrite. Obama has spent the last year implementing his Health Care Plan, making it so everyone has access to it. Romney has clearly stated he believes this plan to be worthless and of no use for the public. Yet, Romney implemented his own Health Care Plan in Massachusetts. Again, this confuses people and makes it unclear as to why Romney continues to switch sides so rapidly. If he wants to be in the favor of the people, he needs to state his stance and stick with it. People want a leader who is firm in their beliefs and won't switch sides due to their own interests. Romney does have good ideas but they will be overlooked if he continues to show the people that he has no distinct stance on important issues.
Another reason why Romney has the potential to win is due to his candidates lack of information and presence. Unlike his competitors, Romney has a clean slate. He has done anything disastrous or been found guilty of a crime. Herman Cain will probably suffer due to the charges brought against him but not Romney. And while Perry has failed to show up for a few debates, Romney has not. This shows that Romney is engaged solely in politics and strives to keep a clean record not only for himself but for the people that will ultimately decide whether or not he will be elected: the people. Romney has set the bar high for his competitors and most likely they won't be able to reach it.
While Romney has not done anything terrible, he has shown that he waffles on important issues like Gay Rights and Abortion. When he was Senator Massachusetts, he made it clear during his campaign that women should have the right to decide if they want an abortion. Once he was elected, he changed his stance, making it evident that he was never for abortion in the first place. Romney also did the same thing for gay rights in which he told people that homosexual individuals should have these rights. But once he took office, he took back his words, saying that he was against gay rights. People are a bit confused as to where Romney stands and would like a straight answer.
Romney could also lose not only because of his lack of decisiveness but also because he appears to be a hypocrite. Obama has spent the last year implementing his Health Care Plan, making it so everyone has access to it. Romney has clearly stated he believes this plan to be worthless and of no use for the public. Yet, Romney implemented his own Health Care Plan in Massachusetts. Again, this confuses people and makes it unclear as to why Romney continues to switch sides so rapidly. If he wants to be in the favor of the people, he needs to state his stance and stick with it. People want a leader who is firm in their beliefs and won't switch sides due to their own interests. Romney does have good ideas but they will be overlooked if he continues to show the people that he has no distinct stance on important issues.
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Obama's Favorite Strategy? Avoiding the Issue.
http://www.uclick.com/client/nyt/gm/
While Obama has proved to be quite the icon, he's also proved to be one who is not certain on where he stands. In Glenn McCoy's comic, he illustrates "Senator Obama" as being present for the issues that need to be addressed but "President Obama" as being absent for the important issues. Both pictures are compared side by side, one showing a simple office, the other illustrating the infamous Oval Office. This is made to represent that the problems that the state level are not nearly as crucial as the ones on the national level. On Obama's desk, there is a picture of a tik-tac-toe board emphasizing that even though Obama is present physically, he isn't mentally. He would rather engage in a game of tic-tak-toe than have to worry about discussing important issues. In the picture to the right there's a chart that shows how debt has gone up. Obama is not present in the picture on the right, and this emphasizes that he has not been around physically or mentally while the national debt rate has risen. What makes Glenn McCoy's comic so amusing is how Obama is drawn though. Everything about him is disproportionate (i.e. his ears are huge compared to his stick like arms). He's made to look ignorant and stupid which is how many people perceive Obama to be right now.
McCoy uses the technique of caricature to emphasize how naive Obama has been. By over exaggerating Obama's physical features, it shows that he has not been taken seriously. Even at the state level, he can't be perceived as a good leader. McCoy also uses Labeling to catch his reader's attention by showing them what Obama has not been: present. McCoy clearly bolds the word 'Absent' and 'Debt' forcing the reader to associate those words with him. Over the past few years, Obama has tried to take care of the debt crisis but has managed to show people how inexperienced he is instead. Officially, the recession is over but many Americans are still feeling the fall out and are looking to Obama to help fix that problem. This cartoon illustrates that Obama has moved past this issue causing many Americans to question his stance on important issues. Does he really have a stance on critical issues or is he just trying avoid making a decision all together?
McCoy obviously wants Obama to show the people that he is capable of being a leader and take a stance on important issues like the Debt Rate. For the last few months, Obama has shown the people his weaknesses and how he could easily be replaced next year.No one wants the Debt or Unemployment rate to keep climbing due to a leader who refuses to make decisions. It is important for Obama to continue to be engaged in what's going on and how it effects this nation. The citizens need guidance in order to get out of their current situation. Obama though, has neglected to give them guidance. McCoy probably sees Obama as not a very good president and would like him to address the issues at hand rather than avoid them due to his own interests. It's probably safe to say though that McCoy is a conservative and is looking for a change in office. And if Obama continues to be as active in the issues as he is now, there will probably be a shake-up in office.
While Obama has proved to be quite the icon, he's also proved to be one who is not certain on where he stands. In Glenn McCoy's comic, he illustrates "Senator Obama" as being present for the issues that need to be addressed but "President Obama" as being absent for the important issues. Both pictures are compared side by side, one showing a simple office, the other illustrating the infamous Oval Office. This is made to represent that the problems that the state level are not nearly as crucial as the ones on the national level. On Obama's desk, there is a picture of a tik-tac-toe board emphasizing that even though Obama is present physically, he isn't mentally. He would rather engage in a game of tic-tak-toe than have to worry about discussing important issues. In the picture to the right there's a chart that shows how debt has gone up. Obama is not present in the picture on the right, and this emphasizes that he has not been around physically or mentally while the national debt rate has risen. What makes Glenn McCoy's comic so amusing is how Obama is drawn though. Everything about him is disproportionate (i.e. his ears are huge compared to his stick like arms). He's made to look ignorant and stupid which is how many people perceive Obama to be right now.
McCoy uses the technique of caricature to emphasize how naive Obama has been. By over exaggerating Obama's physical features, it shows that he has not been taken seriously. Even at the state level, he can't be perceived as a good leader. McCoy also uses Labeling to catch his reader's attention by showing them what Obama has not been: present. McCoy clearly bolds the word 'Absent' and 'Debt' forcing the reader to associate those words with him. Over the past few years, Obama has tried to take care of the debt crisis but has managed to show people how inexperienced he is instead. Officially, the recession is over but many Americans are still feeling the fall out and are looking to Obama to help fix that problem. This cartoon illustrates that Obama has moved past this issue causing many Americans to question his stance on important issues. Does he really have a stance on critical issues or is he just trying avoid making a decision all together?
McCoy obviously wants Obama to show the people that he is capable of being a leader and take a stance on important issues like the Debt Rate. For the last few months, Obama has shown the people his weaknesses and how he could easily be replaced next year.No one wants the Debt or Unemployment rate to keep climbing due to a leader who refuses to make decisions. It is important for Obama to continue to be engaged in what's going on and how it effects this nation. The citizens need guidance in order to get out of their current situation. Obama though, has neglected to give them guidance. McCoy probably sees Obama as not a very good president and would like him to address the issues at hand rather than avoid them due to his own interests. It's probably safe to say though that McCoy is a conservative and is looking for a change in office. And if Obama continues to be as active in the issues as he is now, there will probably be a shake-up in office.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Answer to Question #1- 2nd Quarter
"I stand before you today as a disciplined conservative Texan, a committed Republican and a proud American, united with you to restoring our nation and revive the American dream." When one thinks of Rick Perry, all these elements come to mind. Yes he is a Republican, but to some extent he goes against the stereotype of a typical republican. The key word is "Texan" meaning he's from the south and is likely to be more hospitable than say Michelle Bachmann, who is from Iowa. Southeners like Bill Clinton, tend to do very well in the polls because people are attracted to the positive energy they bring. Rick Perry has charisma, something most people are drawn to when he is speaking on TV or talking on the radio. When Perry is talking about the issues he'd like to address in office, he sounds truly believable and genuine. Unlike the other candidates, Perry appears to have nothing pre-rehearsed or looks as if someone has fed him the information. People like to see a candidate who feels strongly about what they believe as well as connect to the candidate on a personal level. Another aspect that works in Perry's favor is he is the Governor of Texas. Unlike Rhode Island or Georgia, Texas is a large state. If Perry has successfully overseen Texas, people will feel confident that he can oversee an entire country. Perry has a lot going for him, and with that in mind he could very well be the GOP nominee.
While Perry appears to have most of his act together, he's not perfect. During the Republican debate between himself and Romney last week, he fumbled resulting in a weeks worth of media uproar. Perry was addressing how he would replace three departments and he only named the Department of Education and the Department of Commerce. He struggled to name the third and said "I can't think of the third one. I can't. Oops." Oops is right. This may to appear to be a small slip up but in reality Perry has lead Americans to believe that he does not know very much. This makes Perry look incompetent and could result in his loss to Mitt Romney. Rick Perry has also had a low turnout when it comes to the debates making him look like a weak debator. While he does have charisma, he also needs to be able to address issues upfront with others otherwise he appears to be an inadequate leader. Perry needs to start attending more debates otherwise the public will dismiss him as the GOP nominee.
While Perry appears to have most of his act together, he's not perfect. During the Republican debate between himself and Romney last week, he fumbled resulting in a weeks worth of media uproar. Perry was addressing how he would replace three departments and he only named the Department of Education and the Department of Commerce. He struggled to name the third and said "I can't think of the third one. I can't. Oops." Oops is right. This may to appear to be a small slip up but in reality Perry has lead Americans to believe that he does not know very much. This makes Perry look incompetent and could result in his loss to Mitt Romney. Rick Perry has also had a low turnout when it comes to the debates making him look like a weak debator. While he does have charisma, he also needs to be able to address issues upfront with others otherwise he appears to be an inadequate leader. Perry needs to start attending more debates otherwise the public will dismiss him as the GOP nominee.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
If You Can't Say Something Intelligent, Don't Say Anything At All.
http://www.time.com/time/cartoonsoftheweek
Around this time of year, many Americans are thinking about the upcoming holidays and festivities. Of course, we are bombarded with commercials about the gifts and goods we could buy and currently, they're more informative than the Republican candidates. In John Cole's political cartoon, he portrays candidates Cain, Romney, Bachmann, Perry and Gingrich as turkeys. This is not only used to emphasize the upcoming holiday but to show that the candidates are not providing the public with beneficial information. In the cartoon, the candidates are 'gobbling' and in there are a few lines from their debates. This shows that the candidates can talk a tremendous amount but they aren't saying anything that informs the people about where they stand on the issues. Unfortunately, turkeys are usually associated with Thanksgiving and likewise candidates are associated with social entertainment. In the corner of the cartoon, a pilgrim is leaning over a piece of wood preparing to chop his head off. On his backside are the words 'GOP.' Usually, this situation would be reversed in which the trukeys' head would be chopped off. This emphasizes that the GOP feels like they have made a fool of themselves and that they are suffering more than the candidates are.
In this cartoon, everything is labeled to emphasize exactly what these people are. This is a common technique of most cartoonist but it's one that works. Turkeys are usually stupid and good for only one purpose: eating. And that's what the media has currently done to these candidates. They have taken everything they've said and eaten it up to the point where they've made these candidates appear to be unintelligent. In the public eye, they're a bit like turkeys. The GOP is also prominently labeled on the backside to emphasize that they've made a**!# of themselves. Cole also uses the technique of exaggeration, in which he overdoes the physical characteristics to make a point. The words "Gobble, gobble" are written in the air of the cartoon to show that the candidates talk way to much. They have their occasional slip ups but otherwise they're boring. They definitely can talk the talk but can they walk the walk?
Are any of these candidates good nominees for the GOP? Who knows but Cole clearly thinks that these candidates need to do a little more than just talk. Yes, it's always amusing to see politicians like Rick Perry openly admit they have no idea what they're talking about during a debate but it's better to see a candidate who knows what they're doing. Cole is probably a democrat due to the fact that all the candidates in the picture are distorted and made to look unintelligent. All the main politicians are displayed in the cartoon meaning he is specifically against these candidates. Even if Cole is against all of these candidates, he has a valid message: the candidates need to get their act together otherwise the public won't take them seriously.
Around this time of year, many Americans are thinking about the upcoming holidays and festivities. Of course, we are bombarded with commercials about the gifts and goods we could buy and currently, they're more informative than the Republican candidates. In John Cole's political cartoon, he portrays candidates Cain, Romney, Bachmann, Perry and Gingrich as turkeys. This is not only used to emphasize the upcoming holiday but to show that the candidates are not providing the public with beneficial information. In the cartoon, the candidates are 'gobbling' and in there are a few lines from their debates. This shows that the candidates can talk a tremendous amount but they aren't saying anything that informs the people about where they stand on the issues. Unfortunately, turkeys are usually associated with Thanksgiving and likewise candidates are associated with social entertainment. In the corner of the cartoon, a pilgrim is leaning over a piece of wood preparing to chop his head off. On his backside are the words 'GOP.' Usually, this situation would be reversed in which the trukeys' head would be chopped off. This emphasizes that the GOP feels like they have made a fool of themselves and that they are suffering more than the candidates are.
In this cartoon, everything is labeled to emphasize exactly what these people are. This is a common technique of most cartoonist but it's one that works. Turkeys are usually stupid and good for only one purpose: eating. And that's what the media has currently done to these candidates. They have taken everything they've said and eaten it up to the point where they've made these candidates appear to be unintelligent. In the public eye, they're a bit like turkeys. The GOP is also prominently labeled on the backside to emphasize that they've made a**!# of themselves. Cole also uses the technique of exaggeration, in which he overdoes the physical characteristics to make a point. The words "Gobble, gobble" are written in the air of the cartoon to show that the candidates talk way to much. They have their occasional slip ups but otherwise they're boring. They definitely can talk the talk but can they walk the walk?
Are any of these candidates good nominees for the GOP? Who knows but Cole clearly thinks that these candidates need to do a little more than just talk. Yes, it's always amusing to see politicians like Rick Perry openly admit they have no idea what they're talking about during a debate but it's better to see a candidate who knows what they're doing. Cole is probably a democrat due to the fact that all the candidates in the picture are distorted and made to look unintelligent. All the main politicians are displayed in the cartoon meaning he is specifically against these candidates. Even if Cole is against all of these candidates, he has a valid message: the candidates need to get their act together otherwise the public won't take them seriously.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Answer to Question #3
"After a century of striving, after a year of debate, after a historic vote, health care reform is no longer an unmet promise. It is the law of the land." Well, you have to give it to Barack Obama. He did say he would guarantee Health Care for all Americans and he followed through with his promise. Whether states want to abide by this law is up to them and currently a lot of states, including Virginia, are trying to repeal this law. A recent poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation reports that 51% of Americans are not in favor of the Health Care Reform which is a new low for the poll since the law was passed. Obviously, not everyone is going to be in favor of the law but Obama should rethink some of the principles involved with the Health Care Reform. For example, one cannot choose their own cardiologist or urologist under their company's Preferred Provider Organization. For many people, the right to choose is important to them and taking that right away causes a shift in public opinion. This unfortunately, is not the only issue that Obama faces.
When Obama came into office, he had to take on the burden of the economic downturn. Currently, Obama is trying to enact his Jobs Plan which entails expanding the payroll tax, preventing layoffs, and creating incentives for small businesses. Personally, these are all excellent ideas to aid the economy and if implemented, would make a difference for many Americans by providing them with benefits they didn't have before. Obama has done a good job promoting this plan and making it his duty to support all Americans who have been effected by economic struggles.
By far, Obama has handled the "War on Terror" well. He has reassured the Muslim people that “we will not stigmatize or demonize entire communities because of the actions of a few.” 9/11 was a devastating day for this country but with the help of the troops, Obama has managed to kill Osama Bin Laden, the man responsible for these deadly attacks. Personally, I'm confident that Obama wants to protect the country. He has recently stated that all troops will be pulled out of Iraq and will be home by December 2011, which is a huge step in the right direction.
Obama does face the opportunity of reelection in about 12 months. And for the last few years he has done a good job of taking on the responsibilities that come with being president. Though he lacks an immense amount of job experience, he has been able to fight for what he believes in and keep up with major politicians like John Boehner. Even though he has done a sufficient job, I don't think he will be reelected. He has kept most of his promises but people would probably like to see someone with more experience take on this job. Overall, I give Obama a B-.
When Obama came into office, he had to take on the burden of the economic downturn. Currently, Obama is trying to enact his Jobs Plan which entails expanding the payroll tax, preventing layoffs, and creating incentives for small businesses. Personally, these are all excellent ideas to aid the economy and if implemented, would make a difference for many Americans by providing them with benefits they didn't have before. Obama has done a good job promoting this plan and making it his duty to support all Americans who have been effected by economic struggles.
By far, Obama has handled the "War on Terror" well. He has reassured the Muslim people that “we will not stigmatize or demonize entire communities because of the actions of a few.” 9/11 was a devastating day for this country but with the help of the troops, Obama has managed to kill Osama Bin Laden, the man responsible for these deadly attacks. Personally, I'm confident that Obama wants to protect the country. He has recently stated that all troops will be pulled out of Iraq and will be home by December 2011, which is a huge step in the right direction.
Obama does face the opportunity of reelection in about 12 months. And for the last few years he has done a good job of taking on the responsibilities that come with being president. Though he lacks an immense amount of job experience, he has been able to fight for what he believes in and keep up with major politicians like John Boehner. Even though he has done a sufficient job, I don't think he will be reelected. He has kept most of his promises but people would probably like to see someone with more experience take on this job. Overall, I give Obama a B-.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Perry: Either Debate or Step Aside.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/27/what-if-perry-skips-the-debates/?ref=politics
By definition, a debate is a formal method of interactive and representational argument. The key word here is "interactive", something Rick Perry has lacked during the last few debates. According to recent reports, Rick Perry, the Republican Governor from Texas, has talked about not participating in the upcoming debates. "I don't think Perry can avoid (debating)", Dana Loesch, a CNN contributor says "because the debates are where he has received a lot of his criticism." Even though Perry is strongly advised not to disengage from debates, he's done it before and still won. For example, when Perry ran for Governor last year, he avoided debating Bill White, the former mayor of Houston. Perry won but White made it clear that he thought Perry was afraid of debating. And from Perry's latest actions, he could be.
Michael Shrear, the writer of this article, emphasizes the importance of debates by comparing Perry to other Republican candidates like Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich who apparently don't have enough money to produce television advertisements for their campaign. For these candidates "the debates are the only opportunity to break through with the national audience." And while Perry has gone a step further by taking advantage of fund raising, he should be taking his time to also participate in the debates. In contrast though, Shrear does say that debates "are a huge intrusion" to candidates. Those who will be debating have to plan ahead and be aware of who else they will be going toe to toe with. But if participating in debates means they have a greater chance of being elected in the primary, than candidates like Rick Perry should take an active role in them rather than sitting out.
Perry could be a potential nominee for the Republican Party. Apparently, he can be "aggressive" and presents some good points for other candidates like Mitt Romney to challenge. But if Perry chooses not to participate, he faces not being elected. In this case, he only has himself to blame. In order for Perry to be considered as a future nominee, he needs to take part in these debates. By showing the people that he is willing to participate in the debate, makes him not only look like an eligible candidate but also someone who can lead this country.
By definition, a debate is a formal method of interactive and representational argument. The key word here is "interactive", something Rick Perry has lacked during the last few debates. According to recent reports, Rick Perry, the Republican Governor from Texas, has talked about not participating in the upcoming debates. "I don't think Perry can avoid (debating)", Dana Loesch, a CNN contributor says "because the debates are where he has received a lot of his criticism." Even though Perry is strongly advised not to disengage from debates, he's done it before and still won. For example, when Perry ran for Governor last year, he avoided debating Bill White, the former mayor of Houston. Perry won but White made it clear that he thought Perry was afraid of debating. And from Perry's latest actions, he could be.
Michael Shrear, the writer of this article, emphasizes the importance of debates by comparing Perry to other Republican candidates like Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich who apparently don't have enough money to produce television advertisements for their campaign. For these candidates "the debates are the only opportunity to break through with the national audience." And while Perry has gone a step further by taking advantage of fund raising, he should be taking his time to also participate in the debates. In contrast though, Shrear does say that debates "are a huge intrusion" to candidates. Those who will be debating have to plan ahead and be aware of who else they will be going toe to toe with. But if participating in debates means they have a greater chance of being elected in the primary, than candidates like Rick Perry should take an active role in them rather than sitting out.
Perry could be a potential nominee for the Republican Party. Apparently, he can be "aggressive" and presents some good points for other candidates like Mitt Romney to challenge. But if Perry chooses not to participate, he faces not being elected. In this case, he only has himself to blame. In order for Perry to be considered as a future nominee, he needs to take part in these debates. By showing the people that he is willing to participate in the debate, makes him not only look like an eligible candidate but also someone who can lead this country.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Answer to Question #2
Abortion has been an on going political issue for decades. Liberals and Conservatives tend to fight over whether or not it's a woman's choice to keep the baby or if it's society's choice. Since I'm a liberal, I support 'pro-choice' because our country is built on the basis of freedom and taking away a person's right to choose would be to take away their freedom. But one of the reasons I gravitate towards this issue is because of the people in charge who are making the decision. They're mostly men. Currently the amount of men in Congress is an overwhelming number compared to the amount of women and yet, they still feel inclined to make this decision. The irony is, their own personal beliefs conflict with how they politically stand. In the past there have been congressmen who have voted against abortion yet their daughters or wives have had one. Essentially it should be up to the women of this society to decide because they have to carry a baby. Even though abortion is seen as murderous, there are some women who are not suitable to be mothers and they could end up hurting themselves and the child during their pregnancy. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion about the issue but when it comes down to the actual decision, it should be given to the mother and no one else.
Bachmann and Cain "Welcome" Illegal Immigrants with Guns and the English Language
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/us/politics/bachmann-and-cain-deliver-blistering-attacks-on-illegal-immigration.html?_r=1&ref=politics
The fight to fix Illegal Immigration has been a huge issue for not just the Democratic Party but also the Republican Party. This past weekend, Republican candidates Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann both publicized how they feel about illegal immigration. Cain even had the audacity to propose that an electric fence should be constructed on the border of Mexico and America to kill those who try to cross illegally. While Bachmann's approach was not extreme, she did make it clear that illegal immigration is a security threat and should be dealt with accordingly. A little harsh? Unfortunately this isn't the first time Cain has suggested that we use military tactics and extreme methods to keep illegal immigrants from entering. Cain has gone on several radio shows and talked about this type of action. He has even compared construction of the electrical fence to the building of the Great Wall of China. His philosophy: "If the Chinese can build the Great Wall then surely we can build a border control fence".
Even though Bachmann is still harsh in her attacks, she takes a more logical approach saying English should be made the official language of America in order to keep those out who cannot speak it. Though she stated she is "not targeting" Hispanics in her attacks she has voted against the DREAM Act and does not believe the immigration laws need to be modified. The fastest growing immigration group in America is Hispanics and from the article many are starting to speak out about Cain and Bachmann's critical comments. “To suggest that they would be electrocuted or shot would be to treat them harsher than we treat murderers or rapists.” Brent A. Wilkes, vice chairman of the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda says. Writers Trip Gabriel and Edward Wyatt, continue to emphasize how strongly Bachmann and Cain feel about the issue by quoting them and using contrasting views of other patrons. By doing so, it makes both Bachmann and Cain look like extremist, which most people aren't in favor of. Personally, I don't want either of these candidates representing the Republican Party if they continue to talk about future amendments or regulations that will increase the value of this country by eliminating illegal immigrants. Is illegal immigration a problem? Yes, but there's a better way of going about this business. If Cain and Bachmann want to represent the Republican Party they'll have to take different approaches to the issue. People are tired of seeing candidates use the same strategies to scare illegal immigrants. They want to see someone that's going to fix the problem without having to use the electrical fence in order to instill a better system.
The fight to fix Illegal Immigration has been a huge issue for not just the Democratic Party but also the Republican Party. This past weekend, Republican candidates Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann both publicized how they feel about illegal immigration. Cain even had the audacity to propose that an electric fence should be constructed on the border of Mexico and America to kill those who try to cross illegally. While Bachmann's approach was not extreme, she did make it clear that illegal immigration is a security threat and should be dealt with accordingly. A little harsh? Unfortunately this isn't the first time Cain has suggested that we use military tactics and extreme methods to keep illegal immigrants from entering. Cain has gone on several radio shows and talked about this type of action. He has even compared construction of the electrical fence to the building of the Great Wall of China. His philosophy: "If the Chinese can build the Great Wall then surely we can build a border control fence".
Even though Bachmann is still harsh in her attacks, she takes a more logical approach saying English should be made the official language of America in order to keep those out who cannot speak it. Though she stated she is "not targeting" Hispanics in her attacks she has voted against the DREAM Act and does not believe the immigration laws need to be modified. The fastest growing immigration group in America is Hispanics and from the article many are starting to speak out about Cain and Bachmann's critical comments. “To suggest that they would be electrocuted or shot would be to treat them harsher than we treat murderers or rapists.” Brent A. Wilkes, vice chairman of the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda says. Writers Trip Gabriel and Edward Wyatt, continue to emphasize how strongly Bachmann and Cain feel about the issue by quoting them and using contrasting views of other patrons. By doing so, it makes both Bachmann and Cain look like extremist, which most people aren't in favor of. Personally, I don't want either of these candidates representing the Republican Party if they continue to talk about future amendments or regulations that will increase the value of this country by eliminating illegal immigrants. Is illegal immigration a problem? Yes, but there's a better way of going about this business. If Cain and Bachmann want to represent the Republican Party they'll have to take different approaches to the issue. People are tired of seeing candidates use the same strategies to scare illegal immigrants. They want to see someone that's going to fix the problem without having to use the electrical fence in order to instill a better system.
Answer to Question #1
Due to the fact that I'm under 18 years old and a female, I tend to be in favor of the Democratic Party. This party leans towards changing the systems in America to make them more coherent and accessible all individuals regardless of social status. For example, they believe immigration plays a large role in the success of this country but they recognize this system is broken. To change the system would be to make it stronger and would not only help immigrants but also aid the economy and national security. Personally, this change should be made because America is built on diversity and will continue foster more immigrants. The current system will not last under a failing economy, so reforming it will encourage not only this generation but future generations to remain positive about immigration.
In addition, Democrats tend to be women because they want to support the people in this country. Recently there have been issues over 'Obamacare' and setting up a proper system that will aid the citizens in this country who do not have it. Should we offer Health Care to everyone or just the individuals who qualify? As a democrat, we should make is accessible to everyone. The reason being is because it gives Americans a sense of equality. Thomas Jefferson wrote "All men are created equal" and sometimes America can lose site of that. By making Health Care available to everyone, it sets a good example for other countries who want to move towards building a democratic system and ensuring equality for all.
In addition, Democrats tend to be women because they want to support the people in this country. Recently there have been issues over 'Obamacare' and setting up a proper system that will aid the citizens in this country who do not have it. Should we offer Health Care to everyone or just the individuals who qualify? As a democrat, we should make is accessible to everyone. The reason being is because it gives Americans a sense of equality. Thomas Jefferson wrote "All men are created equal" and sometimes America can lose site of that. By making Health Care available to everyone, it sets a good example for other countries who want to move towards building a democratic system and ensuring equality for all.
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Hey Romney, Can You Answer Some Questions Please?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/us/politics/social-issues-pose-new-test-for-mitt-romney.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=politics
Lately, Mitt Romney has been faced with questions about his Mormon faith and how it effects his stance on certain social issues such as gay rights, abortion, and health care. The simple thing would be to "shine a light on his problem" (i.e. his religious background) and move forward in his campaign. But Romney, has deferred the attention from himself and focused on controversial issues such as 'Obamacare'. "You measure a leader on how they walk, not how they talk." Rick Perry recently said, specifically directing his comment at Romney. Perry is right though, Romney has done little to show where he clearly stands on a particular issue and if it is based on his faith or not. And unfortunately this is nothing new for him. Before Romney was elected as Governor of Massachusetts, he took a democratic stance on abortion claiming he was "pro-choice" and even said he would support the funding of Planned Parenthood. Prior to his election, he said he would support gay rights and acknowledge the union of same-sex marriages. But after Romney was elected he pulled back from his original statements and opposed gay rights and abortion.
Clearly, Romney can talk the talk but not walk the walk. Obviously his past decisions have lead other politicians, like Rick Perry, to question his beliefs and moral values. This article emphasizes that while Romney says one thing, he clearly has intentions to do another. This brings voters to question whether or not Romney is being influenced by his religious background and if so, will this hinder his opportunity of being elected to run in the primary? The content of the article hints that it will."Mr. Romney’s broader challenge: establishing himself as authentic and principled, and battling the perception that he has reshaped himself for the politics of the moment." Michael D. Shrear writes. The key words are "authentic" and "principled" neither of which Romney seems to be trying to portray. If he wants to pull ahead of his opponents he must address this issue surrounding his religious beliefs otherwise his chances of being elected are slim. Even though Romney "reaches out" to conservative voters, it's not enough. He would gain much needed respect and even sympathy if he explained his decisions and actions to the public. For example, Kennedy knew the voters were skeptical due to his Catholic background. Kennedy made it apparent though, that his Catholic beliefs would not determine his decisions on particular issues, such as abortion. In my opinion, Romney needs to approach it from that angle because this country will not be lead by a president who bases their decisions off their faith. Americans want a leader not a preacher.
Lately, Mitt Romney has been faced with questions about his Mormon faith and how it effects his stance on certain social issues such as gay rights, abortion, and health care. The simple thing would be to "shine a light on his problem" (i.e. his religious background) and move forward in his campaign. But Romney, has deferred the attention from himself and focused on controversial issues such as 'Obamacare'. "You measure a leader on how they walk, not how they talk." Rick Perry recently said, specifically directing his comment at Romney. Perry is right though, Romney has done little to show where he clearly stands on a particular issue and if it is based on his faith or not. And unfortunately this is nothing new for him. Before Romney was elected as Governor of Massachusetts, he took a democratic stance on abortion claiming he was "pro-choice" and even said he would support the funding of Planned Parenthood. Prior to his election, he said he would support gay rights and acknowledge the union of same-sex marriages. But after Romney was elected he pulled back from his original statements and opposed gay rights and abortion.
Clearly, Romney can talk the talk but not walk the walk. Obviously his past decisions have lead other politicians, like Rick Perry, to question his beliefs and moral values. This article emphasizes that while Romney says one thing, he clearly has intentions to do another. This brings voters to question whether or not Romney is being influenced by his religious background and if so, will this hinder his opportunity of being elected to run in the primary? The content of the article hints that it will."Mr. Romney’s broader challenge: establishing himself as authentic and principled, and battling the perception that he has reshaped himself for the politics of the moment." Michael D. Shrear writes. The key words are "authentic" and "principled" neither of which Romney seems to be trying to portray. If he wants to pull ahead of his opponents he must address this issue surrounding his religious beliefs otherwise his chances of being elected are slim. Even though Romney "reaches out" to conservative voters, it's not enough. He would gain much needed respect and even sympathy if he explained his decisions and actions to the public. For example, Kennedy knew the voters were skeptical due to his Catholic background. Kennedy made it apparent though, that his Catholic beliefs would not determine his decisions on particular issues, such as abortion. In my opinion, Romney needs to approach it from that angle because this country will not be lead by a president who bases their decisions off their faith. Americans want a leader not a preacher.
So really Romney? Are you going to address the attacks or pull the bate and switch again?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)