http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/17/opinion/a-republican-talks-sense-on-taxes.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
Money: It's the number one thing that most couples will fight about which most likely leads to a break up or divorce if not handled properly. To be honest, there is no proper way to handle money. Congress creates an excellent example, in which they can't find a way to balance their budget without causing a federal debt or have a bigger deficit than revenue. In this New York Times editorial, the writer talks about a new bill that was introduced in the house to raise a surtax on those incomes who exceed one million dollars. "Representative Rick Crawford, a freshman Republican from Arkansas, says the only serious way to begin cutting the deficit is to combine new tax revenue with spending cuts." Easier said than done. The bill would require the government to come up with a balanced budget for the fiscal year, which would be difficult to determine seeing how this country is suffering from a recession. Representative, Rick Crawford from Arkansas, has been criticized for this proposal due to the fact that he's a Republican and the Democrats dominate the House currently. Grover Norquist said Crawford would be in violation because he did sign the 'no-new tax pledge' when he was running for a seat in the House. But Crawford is more concerned with the amount of federal debt than with the voters' perception. No one else in Crawford's caucus will not take him up this offer and ultimately this could lead to another government shut down if the issues over the new unveiling of the budget aren't resolved.
I have to give Crawford credit, at least he is trying to come up with a plane that may pertain to the government's lack of responsibility for its expenditures and revenues. On the other hand, his plan is somewhat unreasonable because to ask the government to come up with a balanced budget for the year is like asking a two month old to comprehend the concept of walking and do it. It's not going to happen or if does, none of us will be here to witness it. Taxing the rich though isn't a bad idea. This has caused many concerns for Republicans and Democrats alike because the question is not if they can do it but is it fair? Personally, these millionaires, even billionaires are able to shell out a little money to support this nation's debt and it won't hurt them. On the other hand though, it is their money and they have been successful enough to earn that sum of money and it is theirs. It's a tough call and if I were sitting in Congress, I wouldn't know what to do.
It would probably be best for Congress though to find out where they spend the most money and why. As we learned in Chapter 14, Congress tends to spend most of the budget on Social Services to support those who have retired. But why are they spending so much on these people? Like the government, people should be responsible for putting away money for when they retire and balancing their revenue versus their expenditures. In comparison to fifty years ago, more people find themselves in debt than they did in the sixties. Instead of supporting those who have retired by raising the tax on the wealthy individuals, the government should issue programs that would help individuals to balance there budget so they can retire without having to worry. But as for now, the government's focus is not placed on things like that and they we'll just have to find a decent and ethical way to maintain the budget.
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Is The Dream Act Just a Dream?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/opinion/dream-act-for-new-york.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
According to dictionary.com, one the definitions of a "dream" is an involuntary vision occurring to a person when they are awake. This involuntary vision could be anything from a personal goal to a universal freedom and for immigrants, The Dream Act accomplishes both. In this New York Times editorial, the writer talks about the challenges New York is facing right now with regards to The Dream Act. This Act would give immigrants the ability to go to college even if they are not a U.S. citizen. This open doors for them by making them eligible college education and military. Not only would it give them a chance to pursue a college career but also it would give them legal status, something most immigrants lack here in the U.S. Currently, New York is one of thirteen states give immigrants the chance to qualify for in state tuition but they do not qualify for financial aid from the government. California, New Mexico, and Texas are the only states that provide immigrants with financial aid from the government. New York though, is working to become the fourth state to do this. But just like all states, they are trying to overcome the legal challenges they face with immigrants and Senator Andrew Cuomo is standing back to review the procedures and guidelines of this bill. "It's hard to see why Cuomo would be hesitant to support these measures. It isn't the expense." So what is it then?
If I had to take guess as to why Cuomo is not proceeding with this bill, it's due to the controversy it would cause. Back when minorities were starting to go to college to gain an education, it was difficult. The change that society experienced was radical as women changed their roles of home makers to first class workers. The same concept applies to immigrants. People view them as being low on the education radar and not knowledgeable enough of the country's past or present. But why keep immigrants from an education when America itself supports and even advertises the fact that they allow foreigners into this country? The point of this Dream Act is to change the way we've been doing things and start providing people with a resource that is necessary to get a higher paying job. The reason why immigrants came here was to learn more and attain a better life not only for themselves but for their children. There children have no control over their nationality but they can control how far their schooling takes them. If they want to pursue a higher degree of learning, then the Dream Act should be passed by the states. These types of immigrants obviously want to make the change in their lifestyles and the government needs to recognize that.
Not only do people worry about this law but they also worry about things such affirmative action. This already gives immigrants the upper hand with regards to jobs but people can't imagine what it will do with regards to college. If the colleges were to choose between the Hispanic and the white child, they would choose the Hispanic due to their nationality. People view this as unfair because if their child, who is not the minority, is working hard, why can't they be chosen. There obviously has to be a balance in which immigrants can't be awarded based on who they are. They also have to show that they are willing to work hard like everyone else. This argument has come about more than a few times within government and it always has the same outcome: discrimination. Again, the Dream Act would promote an image that is not based on discrimination against other races but an image based on hard work and merit. Personally, if immigrants were willing to come into a new country and start a new life, they're probably willing to work hard and get an education for their own well being.
According to dictionary.com, one the definitions of a "dream" is an involuntary vision occurring to a person when they are awake. This involuntary vision could be anything from a personal goal to a universal freedom and for immigrants, The Dream Act accomplishes both. In this New York Times editorial, the writer talks about the challenges New York is facing right now with regards to The Dream Act. This Act would give immigrants the ability to go to college even if they are not a U.S. citizen. This open doors for them by making them eligible college education and military. Not only would it give them a chance to pursue a college career but also it would give them legal status, something most immigrants lack here in the U.S. Currently, New York is one of thirteen states give immigrants the chance to qualify for in state tuition but they do not qualify for financial aid from the government. California, New Mexico, and Texas are the only states that provide immigrants with financial aid from the government. New York though, is working to become the fourth state to do this. But just like all states, they are trying to overcome the legal challenges they face with immigrants and Senator Andrew Cuomo is standing back to review the procedures and guidelines of this bill. "It's hard to see why Cuomo would be hesitant to support these measures. It isn't the expense." So what is it then?
If I had to take guess as to why Cuomo is not proceeding with this bill, it's due to the controversy it would cause. Back when minorities were starting to go to college to gain an education, it was difficult. The change that society experienced was radical as women changed their roles of home makers to first class workers. The same concept applies to immigrants. People view them as being low on the education radar and not knowledgeable enough of the country's past or present. But why keep immigrants from an education when America itself supports and even advertises the fact that they allow foreigners into this country? The point of this Dream Act is to change the way we've been doing things and start providing people with a resource that is necessary to get a higher paying job. The reason why immigrants came here was to learn more and attain a better life not only for themselves but for their children. There children have no control over their nationality but they can control how far their schooling takes them. If they want to pursue a higher degree of learning, then the Dream Act should be passed by the states. These types of immigrants obviously want to make the change in their lifestyles and the government needs to recognize that.
Not only do people worry about this law but they also worry about things such affirmative action. This already gives immigrants the upper hand with regards to jobs but people can't imagine what it will do with regards to college. If the colleges were to choose between the Hispanic and the white child, they would choose the Hispanic due to their nationality. People view this as unfair because if their child, who is not the minority, is working hard, why can't they be chosen. There obviously has to be a balance in which immigrants can't be awarded based on who they are. They also have to show that they are willing to work hard like everyone else. This argument has come about more than a few times within government and it always has the same outcome: discrimination. Again, the Dream Act would promote an image that is not based on discrimination against other races but an image based on hard work and merit. Personally, if immigrants were willing to come into a new country and start a new life, they're probably willing to work hard and get an education for their own well being.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Please Keep School and Religion Separate
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/02/21/2653566/its-still-praying.html
The south is known for its strong religious beliefs and churches that tend to be within a couple of miles from each other. And if you can't find a church in the south, you're an atheist. But should prayer and religion be separate from school? The answer in this Miami Herald Editorial is yes. The editorial, It's Still Praying, talks about how Gary Siplin, a democratic governor from Orlando, intends to pass a bill in Florida that authorizes schools to be subjugated to "inspirational messages" at events like a Pep Rally or an assembly. "Let it be clear that there is no prohibition for a Florida public school student to pray in a classroom-- many a student has done is before a meal or test." So why try to force this type of action onto everyone else who doesn't necessarily want nor may believe in a higher power? It's a concept this editorial tries to wrap its head around as it describes the bill. Originally the bill was designed to affect public and private high schools but now is intended for all public elementary schools around the state. Several groups like the American Civil Liberties and Anti-Defamation League believe this bill to be unconstitutional and an "over-reach" of the governor. Quite frankly, I also agree.
It's no surprise that this is an issue though. Every state battles with the argument of separation of church and state. Religion is a touchy subject for anyone due to differing beliefs and ideas. For children in particular, religion should not be forced upon them but rather they should be given the right to choose. Florida resides in the U.S.A which is built on democracy. The system they have now works for many people because it doesn't force nor prohibit children to practice religion. When reading this article, I found that even some conservative Christian groups did not agree with the bill either. Even though it is their job to bring people to God per say, the people should come willingly not forcefully. How fair would it be to push people who practiced Christianity into practicing Judaism? Individuals, like the one who wrote this editorial, resent this bill because of the way it was presented and how it might be passed without their consent. The point is, this bill needs to be looked over and debated before coming to fruition just as any bill should.
In conclusion, the editorial also points out that it may be an election year for Governor Gary Siplin. Apparently, governors tend to propose bills that could help them win or at least get their name out there. Well, Siplin could find himself at a loss if he continues to propose this bill that obviously is not in favor with the people. “Had the bill merely made reference to protecting any student speech (religious or otherwise) it . . . would have been able to withstand constitutional scrutiny,” Mr. Stemberger noted. John Stemberger of the Florida Family Policy Council, a group that believes that "God is the author of life, liberty and the family" spoke to Miami Herald about this bill. If a man like him is saying that this bill may be a bit of a stretch, then it's probably fair to say it needs to be done away with. Again, nobody should be told whether or not they need to pray, especially in a public high school where it could cause many conflicts.
The south is known for its strong religious beliefs and churches that tend to be within a couple of miles from each other. And if you can't find a church in the south, you're an atheist. But should prayer and religion be separate from school? The answer in this Miami Herald Editorial is yes. The editorial, It's Still Praying, talks about how Gary Siplin, a democratic governor from Orlando, intends to pass a bill in Florida that authorizes schools to be subjugated to "inspirational messages" at events like a Pep Rally or an assembly. "Let it be clear that there is no prohibition for a Florida public school student to pray in a classroom-- many a student has done is before a meal or test." So why try to force this type of action onto everyone else who doesn't necessarily want nor may believe in a higher power? It's a concept this editorial tries to wrap its head around as it describes the bill. Originally the bill was designed to affect public and private high schools but now is intended for all public elementary schools around the state. Several groups like the American Civil Liberties and Anti-Defamation League believe this bill to be unconstitutional and an "over-reach" of the governor. Quite frankly, I also agree.
It's no surprise that this is an issue though. Every state battles with the argument of separation of church and state. Religion is a touchy subject for anyone due to differing beliefs and ideas. For children in particular, religion should not be forced upon them but rather they should be given the right to choose. Florida resides in the U.S.A which is built on democracy. The system they have now works for many people because it doesn't force nor prohibit children to practice religion. When reading this article, I found that even some conservative Christian groups did not agree with the bill either. Even though it is their job to bring people to God per say, the people should come willingly not forcefully. How fair would it be to push people who practiced Christianity into practicing Judaism? Individuals, like the one who wrote this editorial, resent this bill because of the way it was presented and how it might be passed without their consent. The point is, this bill needs to be looked over and debated before coming to fruition just as any bill should.
In conclusion, the editorial also points out that it may be an election year for Governor Gary Siplin. Apparently, governors tend to propose bills that could help them win or at least get their name out there. Well, Siplin could find himself at a loss if he continues to propose this bill that obviously is not in favor with the people. “Had the bill merely made reference to protecting any student speech (religious or otherwise) it . . . would have been able to withstand constitutional scrutiny,” Mr. Stemberger noted. John Stemberger of the Florida Family Policy Council, a group that believes that "God is the author of life, liberty and the family" spoke to Miami Herald about this bill. If a man like him is saying that this bill may be a bit of a stretch, then it's probably fair to say it needs to be done away with. Again, nobody should be told whether or not they need to pray, especially in a public high school where it could cause many conflicts.
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Private vs. Public Matters
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-daum-santorum-20120216,0,5678791.column
Santorum sits on the far right. I mean the very far right. Some, like Meghan Daum of the LA Times, consider Rick Santorum to be an extremist. In her editorial, Santorum: The Personal Isn't Always Political, Daum addresses some issues that have been surrounding him lately, one being his take on gay marriage. He makes it clear that a woman and a man should be the dominate figures in a child's life. He also thinks that gay marriage should be between two men because a child needs a father and without one, they are apparently "lost". "He found that even fathers in jail who had abandoned their kids were still better than no father at all to have in their children's lives." Daum writes. Daum not only addresses the issues surrounding Santorum but also how he has done a poor job of keeping his private life out of the public light. Daum does not actually say it, but indicates that this will be Santorum's downfall if he does not keep it in check. "Santorum's opponents should respect the difference between private life and public policy for this obvious reason: He himself does not."
California is not known for being heavily religous but when faced with Santorum's views, they obviously take some offense to them. Santorum believes that sex should only be used for reproductive reasons and not for pleasure. The streets of LA are not lined with churches, but with places that use sex for pleasure, so LA is not completely on board with this concept. In Karen Santorum's book, she writes about the loss of her son in 1996. Born at 20 weeks, he died two hours later and the Santorum's brought him home to show their children. Apparently, the Santorum's slept with him that night too, with him in between them. To most, this is bizarre and shocking but to the Santorum's it's a way of grieving. So who are we to judge?
The reason why we judge is because Santorum puts his personal business out there. To tell the public about something so personal, like the death of a child, opens the Santorum's up to ridicule because all of us grieve differently. What one person does to heal is not what someone else would do and we feel the need to share our opinions about it. As indicated in Daum's editorial, this could be the death of Santorum's campaign. He has not realized that private matters and public matters are two separate things. While his opponents have realized this, he is still struggling to grasp this concept and as he continues to push his extreme religious views and private burdens onto the public, the farther he will drop in the polls.
Santorum sits on the far right. I mean the very far right. Some, like Meghan Daum of the LA Times, consider Rick Santorum to be an extremist. In her editorial, Santorum: The Personal Isn't Always Political, Daum addresses some issues that have been surrounding him lately, one being his take on gay marriage. He makes it clear that a woman and a man should be the dominate figures in a child's life. He also thinks that gay marriage should be between two men because a child needs a father and without one, they are apparently "lost". "He found that even fathers in jail who had abandoned their kids were still better than no father at all to have in their children's lives." Daum writes. Daum not only addresses the issues surrounding Santorum but also how he has done a poor job of keeping his private life out of the public light. Daum does not actually say it, but indicates that this will be Santorum's downfall if he does not keep it in check. "Santorum's opponents should respect the difference between private life and public policy for this obvious reason: He himself does not."
California is not known for being heavily religous but when faced with Santorum's views, they obviously take some offense to them. Santorum believes that sex should only be used for reproductive reasons and not for pleasure. The streets of LA are not lined with churches, but with places that use sex for pleasure, so LA is not completely on board with this concept. In Karen Santorum's book, she writes about the loss of her son in 1996. Born at 20 weeks, he died two hours later and the Santorum's brought him home to show their children. Apparently, the Santorum's slept with him that night too, with him in between them. To most, this is bizarre and shocking but to the Santorum's it's a way of grieving. So who are we to judge?
The reason why we judge is because Santorum puts his personal business out there. To tell the public about something so personal, like the death of a child, opens the Santorum's up to ridicule because all of us grieve differently. What one person does to heal is not what someone else would do and we feel the need to share our opinions about it. As indicated in Daum's editorial, this could be the death of Santorum's campaign. He has not realized that private matters and public matters are two separate things. While his opponents have realized this, he is still struggling to grasp this concept and as he continues to push his extreme religious views and private burdens onto the public, the farther he will drop in the polls.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Birth Control: Should It Be Available For All Women?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/11/opinion/collins-the-battle-behind-the-fight.html
In Gail Collins' editorial, The Battle Behind the Fight, she talks about Obama's recent bill to make birth control available at hospitals around the nation to all women. "As you probably heard, President Obama changed the new rules on health care coverage to accommodate the howls of outrage from the Catholic bishops." Well, he "tweaked" it Collins says. He made it so that women can receive birth control if their health policy provides it but if not, their insurance will cover it. Catholic churches are still not on board with the idea but they've started to comply with Obama's bill proposal. Though this seems to have caused a huge uproar, the problem is not the bill but Obamacare itself Collins writes. republicans are not pleased whatsoever with this bill and feel that it reveals Obama's weaker points that will cause Obama to not be reelected in the upcoming year. Recently Rick Santorum made some remarks about what a traditional household should consist of. Even though he points the finger at Obama for trying to "impose his ways on others", Santorum is just as guilty. It's evident that he believes the woman should stay home and provide for her family while the husband works full time. Apparently, women are not aloud to use birth control either, Catholic or not.
Do I personally agree with Santorum? No. Not at all. As hinted in the name, birth control is a form of control and taking it away due to Santorum's own religious beliefs is a bad idea. Both religion and sex are both sensitive subjects because it depends on the individual. There are many Catholic women who use birth control even though the Catholic church does not condone it. There are also many Catholic women who don't. But for Santorum to say that every woman should not have access to birth control is not tangible. Agreeing with Obama, women should have the right to go to a hospital, be it Catholic or not, and be able to receive some form of birth control. It is easier for women to pay $3 a month to protect themselves rather than fearing the outcome of an unexpected pregnancy. Obama is doing the best he can to accommodate everyone's needs but unfortunately, this battle is not centered around the Catholic hospitals or churches anymore but around the Republicans who are against Obamacare.
The goal of the Republican Party is to have elect a new face to represent America, and not one that stands for something like Obamacare. Santorum, unfortunately could be that face. Obama has had a trying year and even though I don't expect him to be reelected, I don't expect Rick Santorum to take his place. Santorum is extremely conservative and his ideas of the American Family just don't fit in with society's values of what America stands for today: hard work and the right to choose.
In Gail Collins' editorial, The Battle Behind the Fight, she talks about Obama's recent bill to make birth control available at hospitals around the nation to all women. "As you probably heard, President Obama changed the new rules on health care coverage to accommodate the howls of outrage from the Catholic bishops." Well, he "tweaked" it Collins says. He made it so that women can receive birth control if their health policy provides it but if not, their insurance will cover it. Catholic churches are still not on board with the idea but they've started to comply with Obama's bill proposal. Though this seems to have caused a huge uproar, the problem is not the bill but Obamacare itself Collins writes. republicans are not pleased whatsoever with this bill and feel that it reveals Obama's weaker points that will cause Obama to not be reelected in the upcoming year. Recently Rick Santorum made some remarks about what a traditional household should consist of. Even though he points the finger at Obama for trying to "impose his ways on others", Santorum is just as guilty. It's evident that he believes the woman should stay home and provide for her family while the husband works full time. Apparently, women are not aloud to use birth control either, Catholic or not.
Do I personally agree with Santorum? No. Not at all. As hinted in the name, birth control is a form of control and taking it away due to Santorum's own religious beliefs is a bad idea. Both religion and sex are both sensitive subjects because it depends on the individual. There are many Catholic women who use birth control even though the Catholic church does not condone it. There are also many Catholic women who don't. But for Santorum to say that every woman should not have access to birth control is not tangible. Agreeing with Obama, women should have the right to go to a hospital, be it Catholic or not, and be able to receive some form of birth control. It is easier for women to pay $3 a month to protect themselves rather than fearing the outcome of an unexpected pregnancy. Obama is doing the best he can to accommodate everyone's needs but unfortunately, this battle is not centered around the Catholic hospitals or churches anymore but around the Republicans who are against Obamacare.
The goal of the Republican Party is to have elect a new face to represent America, and not one that stands for something like Obamacare. Santorum, unfortunately could be that face. Obama has had a trying year and even though I don't expect him to be reelected, I don't expect Rick Santorum to take his place. Santorum is extremely conservative and his ideas of the American Family just don't fit in with society's values of what America stands for today: hard work and the right to choose.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Reflection of the Senior Year
If you had asked me a year ago about what I thought of senoir year, I would have told you it was going to be a breeze, that I was going to be able to kick back and relax because I was officially done. But if you had asked me yesterday what I thought about senoir year I would have responded with one word: stressful. I feel as if this emotion has ecompased my senior year and has not let up since the day school started. It hasn't been a terrible year, but it has been full of work and challenges that I would have never expected a year ago. But I know I'm not the only one who feels the stress of this year. Though it's hard to admit, I know everyone is sitting in the exact same boat. We all want to get out of high school and move on. Some will move on to college and others will move onto jobs. The feeling is mutual though and everyone is just trying to find a way out of high school.
While I have felt the pressures of this year I have also been able to look at the positive aspects and respect them too. If someone had told me I would be on Homecoming Court my senior year, I would have laughed. I wouldn't even consider myself princess material, yet somehow I made it onto the Homecoming Court. People would ask me if I wanted to win and I would just respond with "I'm thankful just to be on the Court itself, winning would just be an added bonus." This year's Homecoming by far was my favorite due to the fact that I was surprisingly stress free for the day and wasn't worrying about things like college applications or homework that needed to be completed. I just went out and had a good time, something that I haven't been able to do much at all since this year began.
I've learned that I can get into college. It sounds silly that I would say that, but I constantly was doubting my chances of being accepted to one. I was under the impression that if you come from Fairfax County and you're applying in state than you shouldn't even count on receiving an acceptance letter. "It's a very competitive environment and your GPA may not be high enough" Ms. Connelly said when my parents and I talked to her about colleges back in April of last year. Though it was a simple remark, it scared me to death and that's when the doubts started. They've slowly stopped though. I've been accepted to two of the colleges I've applied for which are Southern Utah University and UNC Greensboro. I'm still waiting for three other responses but I'm okay now. Seeing that I can get into college has really helped boost my confidence. Hopefully the rest of this year will turn out to be a good end to a challenging year. I don't want to continue to struggle the way I have for the first half of the year. I want to be able to look back on my senoir year and see the positive aspects and take the challenges as a learning experience. I'm not alone and being able to talk to people is just a blessing in itself. I've noticed that people have had a leap in maturity and even though we might not all be friends, we come to respect one another and appreciate each others strengths and weaknesses. That has been a guiding light for me so far and I continue to see it as a reminder that I can get through this year.
Green Evolution May Be a Sour Start Towards a Better Planet
http://www.uclick.com/client/nyt/gm/
Going Green: Will it help or hinder us? Recently, the Chevrolet Volt was voted the 2011 Green Car of the Year. "The Chevy Volt is one of the first American-made electric cars to make its way onto consumer radar in quite some time. While the Toyota Prius hybrid has been dominating the Eco market with Honda Civic riding its coattails, the Chevy Volt is approaching things in a slightly different way technologically." Mark Perlman of technobuffulo.com says. The Chevy Volt may be the first American made electric car, but there are still some issues to be worked out with regards to the definition of "Green" and what it will do for this world.
Glenn McCoy of the New York Times illustrates the idea of Green Movement and how it has negatively effected us. In the cartoon, Obama is dressed as the infamous fairy godmother and has granted Cinderella's wish of going to the Ball by turning her carriage into a "Pumpkin". "Great! The Green car you sold me turned into a giant lemon!" Cinderella is yelling at Obama and is giving him grief for the lack of quality in the Green Car or the Chevy Volt. In most of Glenn's McCoy's cartoons, he does not seem to favor Obama tactics and strategies, but this common factor makes it clear that McCoy believes that Obama does not do a good job of keeping his promises. The reason why Obama is dressed as the Fairy Godmother is because in the story of Cinderella, the Fairy Godmother keeps her promises and tells Cinderella that all her dreams and wishes will come to fruition if she goes to the Ball. She cannot simply walk to the Ball so she relies on her Fairy Godmother to give her a good source of transportation. In comparison, many Americans look to people like Obama to give them guidance as to what is the best way to get from point A to point B without using up a plethora of gas or having the car break down due to faulty technology.
McCoy is smart to use the story of Cinderella because everyone is familiar with the outcome. But what if the outcome changed due to terrible advice given by a "wise" Fairy Godmother"? Through this cartoon, McCoy emphasizes that Obama has pushed for Americans to accept the Green ideas and concepts like the Chevy Vault, yet we do not have enough information to prove "going Green" will be affective or helpful to the planet's current state. McCoy uses the strategies like satire and allusion to show that this plan to move towards a greener planet may not have a positive outcome unlike the story of Cinderellla. While the Chevy Vault is a great idea on America's part, it still has some issues that need to be worked out. For example, the battery life. Just like your regular fuel injected engines, the battery in Green mobiles will not last forever and it will need to be replaced more frequently which means more dead batteries will end up in the landfills.
Again, some of the ideas pertaining to the Green movement are great. Recycling is a proven way to maintain the planet without harmful effects. But we still don't know enough about the Green cars to prove that they will help this planet. Hopefully, Obama will see that he needs to back down on the Green plan and focus on bigger issues like the economy and the Jobs Plan.
Going Green: Will it help or hinder us? Recently, the Chevrolet Volt was voted the 2011 Green Car of the Year. "The Chevy Volt is one of the first American-made electric cars to make its way onto consumer radar in quite some time. While the Toyota Prius hybrid has been dominating the Eco market with Honda Civic riding its coattails, the Chevy Volt is approaching things in a slightly different way technologically." Mark Perlman of technobuffulo.com says. The Chevy Volt may be the first American made electric car, but there are still some issues to be worked out with regards to the definition of "Green" and what it will do for this world.
Glenn McCoy of the New York Times illustrates the idea of Green Movement and how it has negatively effected us. In the cartoon, Obama is dressed as the infamous fairy godmother and has granted Cinderella's wish of going to the Ball by turning her carriage into a "Pumpkin". "Great! The Green car you sold me turned into a giant lemon!" Cinderella is yelling at Obama and is giving him grief for the lack of quality in the Green Car or the Chevy Volt. In most of Glenn's McCoy's cartoons, he does not seem to favor Obama tactics and strategies, but this common factor makes it clear that McCoy believes that Obama does not do a good job of keeping his promises. The reason why Obama is dressed as the Fairy Godmother is because in the story of Cinderella, the Fairy Godmother keeps her promises and tells Cinderella that all her dreams and wishes will come to fruition if she goes to the Ball. She cannot simply walk to the Ball so she relies on her Fairy Godmother to give her a good source of transportation. In comparison, many Americans look to people like Obama to give them guidance as to what is the best way to get from point A to point B without using up a plethora of gas or having the car break down due to faulty technology.
McCoy is smart to use the story of Cinderella because everyone is familiar with the outcome. But what if the outcome changed due to terrible advice given by a "wise" Fairy Godmother"? Through this cartoon, McCoy emphasizes that Obama has pushed for Americans to accept the Green ideas and concepts like the Chevy Vault, yet we do not have enough information to prove "going Green" will be affective or helpful to the planet's current state. McCoy uses the strategies like satire and allusion to show that this plan to move towards a greener planet may not have a positive outcome unlike the story of Cinderellla. While the Chevy Vault is a great idea on America's part, it still has some issues that need to be worked out. For example, the battery life. Just like your regular fuel injected engines, the battery in Green mobiles will not last forever and it will need to be replaced more frequently which means more dead batteries will end up in the landfills.
Again, some of the ideas pertaining to the Green movement are great. Recycling is a proven way to maintain the planet without harmful effects. But we still don't know enough about the Green cars to prove that they will help this planet. Hopefully, Obama will see that he needs to back down on the Green plan and focus on bigger issues like the economy and the Jobs Plan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)