"A More Perfect Union" speech presented by Barack Obama on March 18, 2008 may be compared to the famous Martin Luther King's speech “I Have a Dream", or the Declaration of Independence - a very powerful document that was revolutionary for its time.
Senator Barack Obama addressed the nation with one of the greatest speeches ever given, it was not only a wake up call for America, but also a starting of a new era.
Obama mentions that the slave trade went on for twenty years after the signing of the Declaration of Independence and suggests that our forefathers left it up to future generations to perfect this country over time. Listeners are reminded of all the struggles and protests in the courts and the streets that the citizens of the United States have already made to bring these changes. He admits that we have different backgrounds, but suggests his goals to the audience that we are the same making a better future for our children and grandchildren.
In “A More Perfect Union” speech, Senator Obama uses ethos, logos and pathos to persuade Americans to forget the past misfortunes and start a new better life as a united Nation.
One of the reasons why Obama was able to deliver his speech with success was the use of ethos. He begins by telling his “American story” where he states that he is - "the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. He was raised with the help of a white grandfather who... served in Patton’s Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line...” This passage shows that having the blood of both races, he represents an ideal individual to direct a new era in American history. I think this example serves to show that his family was well involved in historical periods of changes in America such as the World War II. He also mentions that his wife has the blood of slavery and that he has other relatives who are of different race and skin color. In mentioning his wife's family background he further ties this fact to the understanding of the struggle for equality as related to slavery.
Obama discusses at length Reverend Wright, his church, and what he gained from entering the world of that church. Obama speaks about Reverend Wright as "a man who helped introduce him to Christian faith, a man who spoke to him about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor..." But, also Reverend Wright "contains within him the contradictions - the good and the bad - of the community that he has served diligently for so many years."
Obama also speaks about his "faith in God and faith in the American people – that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds... Solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American." So, I think it is extremely important that all Americans engage in a full and frank conversation about all these extremely vital issues.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Blog #10, Sebastian Mallaby "Progressive Wal-Mart. Really."
"Progressive Wal-Mart. Really" is the title of Sebastian Mallaby's column in the Washington Post. This article defends the retail giant Wal-Mart against a variety of criticisms. Wal-Mart is obviously a progressive case for market success, perhaps more than any other business that is alive and is good for the poor by virtue of its success.
Of course, there are a lot of points to discuss, for example, "Wal-Mart's critics paint the company as a parasite on taxpayers, because 5 percent of its workers are on Medicaid... In other words, they attack Wal-Mart for having 5 percent of its workers receive health care courtesy of taxpayers when the policy that they support would increase that share to 100 percent." It is my belief that there is no solution to this problem in the current system. There is a situation in which wealthy people can afford fantastic health care and those who are not wealthy will be simply destroyed by the first major illness and will end up with the government paying for their health care by default. I think there is, of course, a need to get the insurance companies out of it completely. To my mind, our current health care system is severely broken and needs to be completely rearranged.
One more point that Mallaby raises - is the fact that Wal-Mart saves consumers $200 billion every year on their purchases, while the federal food stamp programs were worth $33 billion. It looks that Wal-Mart is a bigger welfare provider than the government... I’d like to defend Wal-mart, however, I can’t agree with their lack of understanding of the economic and political fundamentals that gave rise to Wal-mart’s success. But what is clear - is that Wal-mart has benefited the American consumer by introducing discounting into the US retail industry. It’s obvious to me that without Wal-mart, very few retailers would have any lower prices the way Wal-mart has with it’s innovations in warehousing, purchasing and inventory management.
Right now the problem for most Americans is that even though the costs of consumer goods is keeping pace with declines in income, the costs of big ticket items is not. Wal-mart’s success is not an answer to the economic and political issues, but anyway, to my mind the consumer should be in the first place.
Of course, there are a lot of points to discuss, for example, "Wal-Mart's critics paint the company as a parasite on taxpayers, because 5 percent of its workers are on Medicaid... In other words, they attack Wal-Mart for having 5 percent of its workers receive health care courtesy of taxpayers when the policy that they support would increase that share to 100 percent." It is my belief that there is no solution to this problem in the current system. There is a situation in which wealthy people can afford fantastic health care and those who are not wealthy will be simply destroyed by the first major illness and will end up with the government paying for their health care by default. I think there is, of course, a need to get the insurance companies out of it completely. To my mind, our current health care system is severely broken and needs to be completely rearranged.
One more point that Mallaby raises - is the fact that Wal-Mart saves consumers $200 billion every year on their purchases, while the federal food stamp programs were worth $33 billion. It looks that Wal-Mart is a bigger welfare provider than the government... I’d like to defend Wal-mart, however, I can’t agree with their lack of understanding of the economic and political fundamentals that gave rise to Wal-mart’s success. But what is clear - is that Wal-mart has benefited the American consumer by introducing discounting into the US retail industry. It’s obvious to me that without Wal-mart, very few retailers would have any lower prices the way Wal-mart has with it’s innovations in warehousing, purchasing and inventory management.
Right now the problem for most Americans is that even though the costs of consumer goods is keeping pace with declines in income, the costs of big ticket items is not. Wal-mart’s success is not an answer to the economic and political issues, but anyway, to my mind the consumer should be in the first place.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Blog #9, Holly Sklar "The Growing Gulf Between the Rich and the Rest of Us"
Holly Sklar in her article "The Growing Gulf Between the Rich and the Rest of Us" is discussing the growing gap between the rich and the rest of US population. So, she states that "since 2000, America's billionaire club has gained 76 more members while the typical household has lost income and the poverty count has grown by more than 5 million people... Middle-class households, meanwhile, are a medical crisis or outsourced job away from bankruptcy."
I would like to post some statistics about the growing gap between the poor and the rich. I think this is important because one of the strengths of this country over the past hundred years was growing middle class and diminishing number of people living in poverty. Unfortunately, times have changed, according to Holly Sklar, "millions more Americans can't afford adequate health care, housing, child care, food, transportation and other basic expenses above the official poverty thresholds, which are set too low...More budget cuts are in the pipeline for Medicaid, Food Stamps and other safety nets for Americans whose wages don't even cover the cost of necessities."
This recession has hit middle class and poor families severely, the economic gap between the richest and poorest Americans is widening, making people feel desperate,
"household income declined across all groups, but at sharper percentage levels for middle-income and poor Americans. Median income fell last year from $52,163 to $50,303, wiping out a decade's worth of gains to hit the lowest level since 1997... According to the Census Bureau's latest count of 37 million people below the poverty line."
Nowadays I must admit that it is a cruel reality when the rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting more poor and there are fewer people in the middle. It seems to be the two extremes. In this connection I'd like to refer to Sklar, "more tax cuts are in the pipeline for wealthy Americans who can afford the $17,000 watch, $160,000 coat and $10 million helicopter on the Forbes Cost of Living Extremely Well Index."
According to all above said, I suspect that all this sharp inequality and striking injustice may cause aggressively depressed situation in the society. And I completely agree with the author that "without a change in course, the gulf between the rich and the rest of America will continue to widen, weakening our economy and our democracy. The American Dream will be history instead of poverty."
I would like to post some statistics about the growing gap between the poor and the rich. I think this is important because one of the strengths of this country over the past hundred years was growing middle class and diminishing number of people living in poverty. Unfortunately, times have changed, according to Holly Sklar, "millions more Americans can't afford adequate health care, housing, child care, food, transportation and other basic expenses above the official poverty thresholds, which are set too low...More budget cuts are in the pipeline for Medicaid, Food Stamps and other safety nets for Americans whose wages don't even cover the cost of necessities."
This recession has hit middle class and poor families severely, the economic gap between the richest and poorest Americans is widening, making people feel desperate,
"household income declined across all groups, but at sharper percentage levels for middle-income and poor Americans. Median income fell last year from $52,163 to $50,303, wiping out a decade's worth of gains to hit the lowest level since 1997... According to the Census Bureau's latest count of 37 million people below the poverty line."
Nowadays I must admit that it is a cruel reality when the rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting more poor and there are fewer people in the middle. It seems to be the two extremes. In this connection I'd like to refer to Sklar, "more tax cuts are in the pipeline for wealthy Americans who can afford the $17,000 watch, $160,000 coat and $10 million helicopter on the Forbes Cost of Living Extremely Well Index."
According to all above said, I suspect that all this sharp inequality and striking injustice may cause aggressively depressed situation in the society. And I completely agree with the author that "without a change in course, the gulf between the rich and the rest of America will continue to widen, weakening our economy and our democracy. The American Dream will be history instead of poverty."
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Blog Entry # 8, Gerald Graff "Hidden Intellectualism"
Gerald Graff begins his essay "Hidden Intellectualism" with the view that we generally associate "book smarts" with intellectualism and "street smarts" with anti-intellectualism. And, I completely agree with his words, "Real intellectuals turn any subject, however lightweight it may seem, into grist for their mill through the thoughtful questions they bring to it, whereas a dullard will find a way to drain the interest out of the richest subject."
Then Gerald Graff provides an example from his early life to counter his viewpoint. He was "typical teenage anti-intellectual" and his "preference for sports over schoolwork was not-intellectualism so much as intellectualism by other means." He talks about how he wanted to fit in with the "hoods" and also tried to be smart, but did not show it too much for fear of being beaten. In the author 's case, his involvement in sports allowed him to see that discussing and reading about sports, he was able to develop his intellectual skills.
The author emphasizes, "I believed that street smarts beat out book smarts in our culture not because street smarts are nonintellectual, as we generally suppose, but because they satisfy an intellectual thirst more thoroughly than school culture, which seems pale and unreal." In these words I feel strong critique on how schools are missing out on a valuable opportunity to encourage students to learn more academically. The important concept that the author points out is "not to simply exploit students' non-academic interests, but to get them to see those interests through academic eyes." Being involved in non-academic matters such as sports, fashion and music can help the students to develop their academic way of thinking.
To my mind, schools should encourage students to think critically, read and write about areas of their personal interest, the author underlines that "it makes pedagogical sense to develop classroom units on sport, cars, fashion, rap music, and other such topics." So, as long as the students do so in a serious way, there is a chance for them to express their true precious intellect.
Then Gerald Graff provides an example from his early life to counter his viewpoint. He was "typical teenage anti-intellectual" and his "preference for sports over schoolwork was not-intellectualism so much as intellectualism by other means." He talks about how he wanted to fit in with the "hoods" and also tried to be smart, but did not show it too much for fear of being beaten. In the author 's case, his involvement in sports allowed him to see that discussing and reading about sports, he was able to develop his intellectual skills.
The author emphasizes, "I believed that street smarts beat out book smarts in our culture not because street smarts are nonintellectual, as we generally suppose, but because they satisfy an intellectual thirst more thoroughly than school culture, which seems pale and unreal." In these words I feel strong critique on how schools are missing out on a valuable opportunity to encourage students to learn more academically. The important concept that the author points out is "not to simply exploit students' non-academic interests, but to get them to see those interests through academic eyes." Being involved in non-academic matters such as sports, fashion and music can help the students to develop their academic way of thinking.
To my mind, schools should encourage students to think critically, read and write about areas of their personal interest, the author underlines that "it makes pedagogical sense to develop classroom units on sport, cars, fashion, rap music, and other such topics." So, as long as the students do so in a serious way, there is a chance for them to express their true precious intellect.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Blog Entry # 7, George F. Will "Reality television: Oxymoron"
George F. Will in his article "Reality television: Oxymoron" describes as a "race to the bottom" the TV shows in which people "degrade themselves for money." One of George F. Will's main points is the fact that television is all about imitation. For example, in this article it is the television show "Fear Factor." "Fear Factor" was created based on the MTV show and takes the basic concept of Jackass to gain viewers and participants. George F. Will claims the networks that air these shows like "Fear Factor" for the addiction that can be compared to heroin.
In the article "Watching TV Makes You Smarter" by Steven Johnson, Johnson underlines that it takes more brain power to understand and think through some of the shows that are on today. As for George F. Will, he might argue that even if the television shows deal with more complicated concepts and it takes more brain power to pick up on the humor, those television shows are also contributing to our "desensitized nature". He also said, "entertainment seeking a mass audience is ratcheting up the violence, sexuality, and degradation, becoming increasingly coarse and trying to be - its largest challenge - shocking in an unshockable society".
In the article "Thinking Outside the Idiot Box" by Dana Stevens, she argues that Steven Johnson's article was a weak argument,"as long as Johnson defines intelligence strictly in quantitative cog-sci terms ("attention, patience, retention, the parsing of narrative threads," etc.), his case may seem solid... But does that make us any smarter? .. Johnson's claim for television as a tool for brain enhancement seems deeply, hilariously bogus." George F. Will might also agree with the argument that Stevens makes. He forms a list of different technological devices and says, “this is progress: more sophisticated delivery of stupidity.”
As for Dana Stevens, she emphasizes the idea that the new complicated television shows don't make people use their brain and think outside the box. And I'd like to agree with her that television viewers don't watch TV shows for the brain stimulation, they watch it for entertainment and because it is what is popular today.
In the article "Watching TV Makes You Smarter" by Steven Johnson, Johnson underlines that it takes more brain power to understand and think through some of the shows that are on today. As for George F. Will, he might argue that even if the television shows deal with more complicated concepts and it takes more brain power to pick up on the humor, those television shows are also contributing to our "desensitized nature". He also said, "entertainment seeking a mass audience is ratcheting up the violence, sexuality, and degradation, becoming increasingly coarse and trying to be - its largest challenge - shocking in an unshockable society".
In the article "Thinking Outside the Idiot Box" by Dana Stevens, she argues that Steven Johnson's article was a weak argument,"as long as Johnson defines intelligence strictly in quantitative cog-sci terms ("attention, patience, retention, the parsing of narrative threads," etc.), his case may seem solid... But does that make us any smarter? .. Johnson's claim for television as a tool for brain enhancement seems deeply, hilariously bogus." George F. Will might also agree with the argument that Stevens makes. He forms a list of different technological devices and says, “this is progress: more sophisticated delivery of stupidity.”
As for Dana Stevens, she emphasizes the idea that the new complicated television shows don't make people use their brain and think outside the box. And I'd like to agree with her that television viewers don't watch TV shows for the brain stimulation, they watch it for entertainment and because it is what is popular today.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Blog Entry # 6 Amy Goldwasser "What's the Matter with Kids Today?"
Amy Goldwasser in her essay "What's the Matter with Kids Today?" offers her view on today's young people Internet worshiping. She claims young generation's "stunning ignorance" of history and literature... who have read nothing, knowing only some specialty or other, for instance, computers."
I must say from my experience children these days are lazy to read books, it is easier for them to watch TV or use computer. To my mind Goldwasser’s answer here is not exactly but right: "The Internet according to 88-year-old Lessing, has "seduced a whole generation into its inanities." Actually, I don’t think it’s really "the kids" who have changed a lot but the adults. Every generation thinks that the youth that comes after them are somehow “less” than they were. And, what else may be added - nothing can be done with progress - this is the natural process how the life goes...
For sure, kids tend to know more than the previous generation because they have easier access to information by using internet to get connected to social networks such as face book or my space. I can't deny that nowadays children have more possibilities to learn about a lot of new things online. Teenagers are reading and writing more and spending about 16.7 hours per week on the internet writing and reading and all this, I hope, is for educational purposes. So, it looks that the internet is not a bad thing at all, because it offers learning benefits and makes kids to write and read more than they usually do. Having the internet, teenagers get unlimited access to any information from all over the world. They, of course, can use this information to educate themselves and be better at school.
I completely agree with Goldwasser when she emotionally states: "Once we stop regarding the Internet as a villain, stop presenting it as the enemy of history and literature and worldly knowledge, then our teenagers have the potential to become the next great voices of America."
I must say from my experience children these days are lazy to read books, it is easier for them to watch TV or use computer. To my mind Goldwasser’s answer here is not exactly but right: "The Internet according to 88-year-old Lessing, has "seduced a whole generation into its inanities." Actually, I don’t think it’s really "the kids" who have changed a lot but the adults. Every generation thinks that the youth that comes after them are somehow “less” than they were. And, what else may be added - nothing can be done with progress - this is the natural process how the life goes...
For sure, kids tend to know more than the previous generation because they have easier access to information by using internet to get connected to social networks such as face book or my space. I can't deny that nowadays children have more possibilities to learn about a lot of new things online. Teenagers are reading and writing more and spending about 16.7 hours per week on the internet writing and reading and all this, I hope, is for educational purposes. So, it looks that the internet is not a bad thing at all, because it offers learning benefits and makes kids to write and read more than they usually do. Having the internet, teenagers get unlimited access to any information from all over the world. They, of course, can use this information to educate themselves and be better at school.
I completely agree with Goldwasser when she emotionally states: "Once we stop regarding the Internet as a villain, stop presenting it as the enemy of history and literature and worldly knowledge, then our teenagers have the potential to become the next great voices of America."
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Entry # 5, Paul Campos "Being Fat is OK"
Paul Campos in his essay "Being Fat is OK" offers a strongly worded response to a "propaganda war." I think it is unfair that the media has used weight in order to make money on people.
So, Campos presents and attempts to refute what he calls three "lies." And I agree that many people are very focused on their weight. I know people that are within their BMI and still think they are fat. Focusing too much on the weight is really damaging. That is true and only very few people realize that. The writer states that he runs 35 to 40 miles a week, but he is still "overweight." And on the contrary, if you are skinny it does not mean you are healthy. Some skinny people are not healthy and they still think that they are fat, but also some people are overweight and think they are fine the way they are, but have many health risks.
On the one hand, I agree that eating habit is a private matter. On the other hand, I still insist that people cannot just choose to be thinner and the author of this essay emphasizes: "the failure rate for diets is estimated to be between 90 percent and 98 percent... any statistically significant group of dieters will end up weighing more, on average, than a comparable group that never began dieting."
I do agree that people always worry about their weight whether they are fat or not. But also, I think that as long as they are healthy then they should not worry too much.
In conclusion, instead of concentrating on different studies about the supposed health risks of fat and going through different methods to lose weight, I believe that people should enjoy life and be happy and stay healthy no matter what size they are.
So, Campos presents and attempts to refute what he calls three "lies." And I agree that many people are very focused on their weight. I know people that are within their BMI and still think they are fat. Focusing too much on the weight is really damaging. That is true and only very few people realize that. The writer states that he runs 35 to 40 miles a week, but he is still "overweight." And on the contrary, if you are skinny it does not mean you are healthy. Some skinny people are not healthy and they still think that they are fat, but also some people are overweight and think they are fine the way they are, but have many health risks.
On the one hand, I agree that eating habit is a private matter. On the other hand, I still insist that people cannot just choose to be thinner and the author of this essay emphasizes: "the failure rate for diets is estimated to be between 90 percent and 98 percent... any statistically significant group of dieters will end up weighing more, on average, than a comparable group that never began dieting."
I do agree that people always worry about their weight whether they are fat or not. But also, I think that as long as they are healthy then they should not worry too much.
In conclusion, instead of concentrating on different studies about the supposed health risks of fat and going through different methods to lose weight, I believe that people should enjoy life and be happy and stay healthy no matter what size they are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)