Anna Juan

In her New Yorker cover for September 12, 2011, Ana Juan persuades the viewers to mourn the loss of the victims of the September 11 attack on the World Trade Center. To persuade the minds of the viewer, Ana Juan creates a New York skyline, with the reflection of the Twin Towers in the water, rather than the buildings, in reference to the new memorial pools that were being built for the tenth anniversary of the attack, dark colors, and sharp lines. By creating this image of closure and reflection, Juan forces her readers to sense a loss in New York. She hopes that by connecting to those that view the cover in this way, they will commemorate the attack and the victims, on the tenth anniversary.

Write a Reflection about the way past and present are depicted in the drawing.

Juan perfectly brings together the past and the present in her drawing to create a better future. To represent the past, she shows the reflection of the Twin Towers that used to stand in the drawn out New York skyline. To represent the present, she creates a New York skyline where these two buildings are missing. To represent how these two components can look towards a brighter future, she places the buildings in the water to represent the memorial pool that was placed at Ground Zero a few months after this was published. Ana even said of her drawing “I have to brainstorm while grieving”. Even while she was reflecting on the past, as someone who witnessed the 9-11 attack first hand, she brainstorms how to commemorate the victims in the future.

Apple and Big Brother

Apple’s privacy dilemma, which is currently being argued in the court system, is one of many crucial components. While the government should not be lacking any information helpful to a criminal investigation, the government should also not infringe on the privacy of the citizens or the amount of loyal customers Apple receives. While Apple should give access to government officials with a search warrant, there should be a set bar the government cannot pass. The government should not reach the point where they take away from the relationship or the privacy between Apple and its customers, but they should not be withheld from gaining information about a criminal. The government should be given the right to view the information on the phone of a criminal suspect, but there should be some set of boundaries to maintain the first amendment rights.

In the specific cases of the December California shooting and the drug dealings the US government wishes to uncover, crucial information may be being withheld from government investigators. Requesting information from Apple is just a simple routine for investigation. If it is legal for government officials to ask a company to unlock a safe, a home, a car, or anything else that may block them from receiving the information they need, why should an iphone be different? Judge Orenstein stated that “Apple is not doing anything to keep law enforcement agents from conducting their investigation,” and while this may be true in this specific case, what if there is another case where critical information is left on an iphone? If this happens, will Apple still continue to refuse giving the government access?

Although I do believe in criminal cases Apple should grant the government needed information, I do see that a clear boundary needs to be set, in order not to infringe on the business Apple conducts. Since the 1983 commercial pitch where Steve Jobs asked the question, “Will Big Blue dominate the entire computer industry? The entire information age? Was George Orwell right about 1984?”, Apple has been known for their concerns of their privacy and freedom of their customers. This is one factor of Apple products that appeals consumers. Once the government takes away this appeal, Apple could lose business. Two boundaries that could be set to avoid this infringement are forcing all technology companies to unlock their products when needed and not forcing Apple to remove their ten tries policy, where an iphone owner can choose in the settings to delete all data after ten incorrect password attempts to unlock the iphone. Setting these boundaries would insure that the government does not effect the competition of technology and the company of Apple. This idea is supported by previous Supreme Court cases dealing with Roosevelt’s New Deal acts that were declared unconstitutional because they interfered with business competition, including the National Industrial Recovery Act.

The government should also set boundaries to insure they do not infringe on citizen’s first amendment rights. Apple responds to 1984 in their 1984 ad, by giving off the message that citizens should have freedom with their technology. After 9-11, the inspection of phone calls became a huge debate, but was constitutional because it was a time of emergency. If the safety of citizens depends on whether or not the government has access to locked information, the government should be granted this information. However, to insure that the government does not take advantage of this privilege, like in 1984, certain boundaries should be kept. The government should only be allowed access when really needed and the ten try policy should be kept. Citizens have a right to privacy on their phones, and the benefits of removing this setting will not outway the costs. People may feel that all their information is more accessible to the public and feel a loss of privacy the first amendment grants them. United States courts have even previously ruled that coding is a form of free speech, so the ten try policy may make citizens feel a lack of free speech.

While both Apple and the government have strong cases, the government is trying to do its job in protecting the safety of the citizens and enforcing the law. While I do agree that certain actions may take place that affect the business of Apple and the first amendment rights of customers, certain boundaries can be put in place to insure that this does not happen.

Go Carolina

David Sedaris, in his essay “Go Carolina” (2000), claims that there are flaws in the system of therapy and treatment of unique students. Sedaris supports his claim by comparing his teacher to an agent, having a careful choice of diction, having a humorous tone, exaggerating, and using personal anecdote throughout almost his entire essay. By using personal anecdote and his touch of humor, he is able to drag the reader to empathize with his daily life as a student who has experienced this flawed system. He hopes that he will connect with his readers in a way that they will understand and do their best to make people who seem different or weird feel comfortable with being themselves or working to improve or change.

2. Reflect on how humor is used to get across a point that may not be funny.

As students, especially of middle and high school, use humor as a way to pick out issues or abnormalities another kid or adult may have. Sedaris uses humor when explaining the stereotypes of different types of kids in school, including himself. He makes jokes of the way he talks, the fact that he does not like sports, and the possible future he may have, as this is the way other students take about his different characteristics. Sedaris not only points out the humor in the challenges of his life, but in his speech therapists’ as well. He is showing that the humor kids use to make fun of or ostracize other students can be harmful, but is so common. He shows that students use humor against both other kids and faculty and presents this as a serious issue, as it clearly affects him in the story.

3. Use a few lines from the essay to characterize Sedaris’s tone.

“Whereas those around me might grow up to be lawyers or movie stars, my only option was to take a vow of silence and become a monk. My former classmates would call the abbey, wondering how I was doing, and the priest would answer the phone. “You can’t talk to him!” he’d say. “Why, Brother David hasn’t spoken to anyone in thirty-five years!”

These lines show Sedaris’s humorous, yet embarrassed tone. While he makes jokes of his ability to speak, like any other student would, he is still bothered by the fact that he has both a voice and personality that may cause people to make fun of him. While he jokes of becoming a monk, so he will no longer have to speak, there is some truth to his yearning to be silent. He does not want his voice to be so noticeably different.

4. Locate a few places where Sedaris uses hyperbole to get across his point. How and why is he using that exaggeration?

Sedaris uses hyperbole when he compares the speech therapist to a secret agent and calls her “Agent Sampson”, when he overthinks the response to his favorite football team, and when he ponders the reasons for Mrs. Sampson’s party at their last therapy session. Sedaris uses exaggerated details to get his point across. while he could simply state that the therapist was calm, yet on a mission, he created a whole idea of how he viewed his therapist that we could connect to. If he did not exaggerate, it would be hard to understand his view of the story. We would not be able to understand how it feels to be a student in this type of position. The use hyperboles allows the reader to understand how the author feels throughout his experience.

The Nobel Lecture in Literature

Toni Morrison, in her Nobel Lecture in Literature (1931), suggests a reform in the way the modern world uses language. Morrison uses an formal diction and analogy of a bird in a human’s hand to support this reform. She uses this unique word choice and analogy in order to show the unstable situation words are in and the idea that humans have the ability to bring words to life in a meaningful way. She hopes that her audience of writers and influential personalities will see language in a new light and be inspired to rethink their word choice to give off images and thoughts through the use of words.

1. Write a paragraph that discusses Morrison’s attitude towards language.

Morrison is greatly appreciative towards language. She recognizes the beauty of being able to put thoughts and images into words that can be vividly describe to anyone, even the blind. She believes it is even more exciting to be able to use the correct diction, syntax, and other rhetorical devices to give an artistic style to language. She is upset that the world has become so accustomed to language, and therefore misuses it. She sees that people rather just look at something than describe it. In a world where vision is the most popular form of communication, she wishes that society would return back to using carefully thought out language.

2. Do you think the use of the fable within the speech works? Why or why not?

I thought the use of the fable worked in the speech, as it drew the audience’s attention in while proving her point. As she speaks about the importance of language to describe a scene, she uses thought out language to describe a scene. She uses this fable of the bird, not only as an analogy for language, but as an example of how we can use language to describe a scene. She wrote a beautifully written fable that perhaps will inspire the audience to describe their own stories with thought out language.

3. Respond to the line “Word-work is sublime” (paragraph 25)

As humans, we have the privilege of being able to use language. Unlike animals who communicate through various sounds that say they want to mate, are hungry, or a preditor is coming, humans can use any words they want to describe thoughts, stories, or feelings. It is a sublime thing that as humans, we can have a feeling in us and then we can describe it to someone else through the use of words, and if we use the incorrect word, we are describing something completely different. We have to greatly appreciate how special it is that we can articulate our thoughts into a sentence and allow the rest of mankind to understand what we feel or think.

The Importance of Getting History Right

It is important to completely understand the situation of Chinese immigration in the early twentieth century, because this led America to almost completely close its borders to fleeing European refugees during the second World War. Americans blamed the Chinese for their crime, the unsanitary conditions of their city, and their lack of available jobs. Since the Chinese worked for less money, they were offered jobs instead of Americans and Americans felt that the Chinese were only in the country to steal their money. This led to a portrayal of immigrants as gross, inhumane groups that came to benefit themselves and destroy Americans. Because of the anti-Chinese propaganda, immigrants as a whole began to look dangerous, and therefore a limited amount were allowed in the country. Immigration dropped by 8,000,000 from the beginning of the century to the 1930s and fleeing Europeans failed to find a safe home during World War II. Many of the deaths that took place in the second world war could have been avoided if the victims were given access to America. We are in the same situation today. We have anti-Islamic propaganda going around the world and country. We are in fear of the Syrian refugees terrorizing our country, as the Americans in the twentieth century feared the Chinese would take all of their money. We cannot be the cause of the tragedies that may happen to these Syrian refugees because of fear. We must close our eyes to propaganda and see the bigger picture. The refugees need our help, much like they did only a few decades ago.

Vietnam Veterans Memorial

Maya Lin’s Vietnam Veterans Memorial (1982), pushes viewers to think about the importance of the people and environment around them. By creating a reflective wall, slowly lowering viewers into a sea of names, and placing the sculpture in the famous national mall, Lin is placing the viewer in an environment where they are forced to think about where they are and the individuals named on the wall. She places the viewer in this environment, in order that they will begin to think about what each individual did to service the country they are in the capital of. Maya Lin is trying to force those viewing her work to think about what each human being does to contribute to a others’ surroundings and situations.

1. The memorial is unusual in design and it’s naming of all armed services members killed in the war. Comment on your reaction to its appearance and to the names on its wall.

Two major characteristics of this memorial are the reflective walls and the declining ramp that lead to the center of the memorial. Both of these aspects create a dense and crowded feeling, as if you’re surrounded on all sides by these names. Vietnam was the first war that was constantly viewed through television and it really allowed people to feel empathy for the soldiers and view them as individuals. Perhaps Maya Lin felt the same way. She wanted the viewer to enter the memorial and be surrounded by these names and really feel gratitude for each individual that was killed defending our country. When I visited the memorial this past summer, I wished that I could know who each of these soldiers were. There were so many names on the wall at the beginning, and as the walls got taller, the names began to crowd more and were filled. I really began to think about who these individuals could be. It was overwhelming, yet forced me to open my eyes to the power of the individual.

2. Speculate on the message this kind of memorial sends about armed services veterans, viewers, and war.

Rather than showing an example of what war was like, or a significant event in a war, like most memorials, Maya Lin creates a memorial that includes every individual that was killed throughout the entire war. She even makes sure that the center of the memorial includes the meeting of the names of individuals who died at the beginning of the war and names of individuals who died at the end. The memorial shows us the individual lives that were taken throughout the Vietnam War. It shows the viewers that every individual soldier is important and deserves gratitude. Rather than ignoring the large group of veterans we hear about, we should do our efforts to appreciate and feel empathy for every single one. It should also inspire the viewer to recognize how important they can be, despite the fact that they are only an individual. The memorial also shows the cost of war. So many individuals’ lives ended in this war, and the only information a viewer has on their lives is an overwhelming amount of names.

Living Like Weasels

Annie Dillard, in “Living Like Weasels”, suggests a lifestyle that includes exploration and not giving into fear. She uses a personal anecdote to support her idea, keeps the reader interested by the use of alliteration, parallelism, and metaphors, and appeals to the audience’s emotions by telling off her deep, vulnerable thoughts. Dillard delivers personal thoughts and uses rhetorical devices in order to add a more poetic feeling to her writing that will carry the reader through her ideas. Her goal is to connect to the emotion of her readers, in hopes that they will not turn away from opportunities, because of fear, like she did when she came face to face with the ferret.

Question 3: Write down the verbs that are most important to the argument Dillard makes and consider what they contribute to her aim.

The most powerful verbs Dillard uses in her argument are to “vow”, to “seize”, and to “dangle”. The three actions go together in order to fill the initial goal Dillard wants her audience to achieve. She wants them to keep sticking to their interests and opportunities, and not turn away in fear. In order to do this, a person needs to first vow to take on this task. This is how they develop their motivation to be successful. Next, a person must seize the day. They must take every opportunity given to them to accomplish this goal. The last step a person must take to accomplish this goal is to let himself dangle. He must be able to not fear any challenges that are in the way and continue to focus on accomplishing the goal.

Question 4: Find two lines or so that characterize the tone of this essay and comment on how they reveal the tone.

“I have been reading about weasels because I saw one last week. I startled a weasel who startled me, and we exchanged a long glance.”

These lines characterize Dillard’s calm and enlightened tone. Dillard creates a calming poetic style by the use of alliteration and description of nature. Like many transcendentalists, Dillard’s writing reflects the calm feeling of being surrounded by nature. Dillard also seems enlightened throughout her essay. She had an interaction with a weasel, and now she is taking a life lesson from it. In these lines, the fact that she researched weasels because she saw one, shows how enlightened and inspired she is by her interaction.

Question 5: This Essay suggests the need for the wild in life. How would you describe what Dillard means by “wild”?

Dillard does not mean that one should do the most risky and outrageous things in life, rather, she is suggesting to not let fear stop you from achieving what you want to achieve. She uses her personal example of seeing the weasel. She was curious and would have wanted to learn more about it, but she was so stunned and scared it might attack her or hurt her, that she froze and cannot even remember the instant. She suggests that people, when coming close to their dreams or opportunities, should not run away in shock or fear. She wants people to take risks and give all that they possibly can to achieving their goals.

Oregon Militia

Bruce Vanwyngarden, in his article Making Tennessee Great Again (1/7/16), suggests that the militias occupying the wildlife refuge in Oregon are ridiculous, wrong, and crazy. Vanwyngarden uses satire to bring out the seemingly ridiculous points the members of the militia, and its supporters, has made. He declares his views towards government in a disrespectful manner, threatens his audience with extremely dangerous weapons, and assertively mentions the fact that he is white in order to bring out the ridiculous declarations the militia has made over the past few weeks. Vanwyngarden hopes to raise America’s attention to the unacceptable  behavior the militia is getting away with, in hopes that the attention will bring a stop to this occupation and justice to the militia.

I am disturbed by the fact that the militia occupation, that started a few weeks ago, is still going on today. Although I understand that the members are not threatening anyone, they are breaking laws and threatening the power of the government. Until today, I was unaware of this event, and to read about this event was upsetting and angered me. Not only do I disagree with the views of the militia, I also disagree with their tactics and the actions the government has taken to solve this issue.

Although America is a free country, there are limits to insure public good and safety. While trespassing would not upset me so much, a well planned occupation of government property does. Especially while they are announcing the many weapons they have and shouting insulting slurs, how can someone expect to get respect and be successful? Sadly, they are accomplishing their goals. They are getting respect, in the sense that people see them as a threat. They are successful, in the fact that they are still occupying this land and the state government in Oregon has not been able to function properly, because they have had to deal with this issue. The fact that an immature group of people can get achieve their goals in such a disrespectful manner makes me angry.

Resilience: "Not just to survive, but to thrive."

Parul Sehgal writes about the transformation of resilience in his article, “The Profound Emptiness of ‘Resilience’” in response to those that are ashamed of what resilience is today. Sehgal recognizes the overuse of resilience today, as it appears in parenting magazines, books, government policies, and college campuses. Many would argue that this overuse of resilience has caused America to be whiny and seemed spoiled. While real resilience would be the first African American student at a college surviving his first day, protests and actions at Yale against racism is an act of whining students, and can barely be classified as resilience. While Sehgal disagrees with this idea and explains that the transformation of resilience into its overuse today is extraordinary, as it teaches Americans not to just survive, but to push for what they want and feel is right. Sehgal explains that African American students should not just be happy they are allowed in a school, they should be able to feel equal to all other students and fight against racism on their campus.

I strongly agree with Parul Sehgal that resilience today means, and should mean, “not just to survive but to thrive”. Not only do I agree, because it is important for one to stand up for what he/she believes in, but because when one does not continuously thrive, they slowly reach the point to where they cannot survive. This past summer I saw what happens when resilience is only to survive, and not to thrive. After visiting old and destroyed Jewish communities, destroyed buildings and cemeteries that were once included in ghettos for Jews, Mass Graves for whole Jewish communities and orphaned Jewish children, and Nazi Concentration Camps in Poland, I went to Denmark, where I worked at a summer camp for non-affiliated German Jews. Throughout history, Jews have struggled with resilience, with the Greek and Roman empires, the Spanish Inquisition, and the most recent struggle, the Holocaust. When working with these children and teenagers in Denmark, I saw one contributing factor for our recurring struggles. My week in Denmark opened up my eyes to see that Jews around the world are not taking the word “resilience” to mean “to thrive”. When Kosher labels are not allowed in their home country, because citizens will not buy food that they assume supports Israel, kids have to be conscious where they wear their Yarmulkes and where they pray, and one friend who is pursuing a political career was asked in an interview, “Are you Jewish or are you German?”, it is clear that resilience needs to take the place of “thriving”. We are seeing signs worldwide that we saw before the Holocaust, and we need to thrive before we reach our struggle to survive. When my grandparents could no longer feel safe in school in Germany, my grandmother moved to America and my grandfather moved to Switzerland. When he no longer felt safe there, he came to America. We should not let it get to the point, where Jews are being pushed around the world to find safety. People are boycotting Jewish businesses, attacks in France have been recurring against Jews, and a one week camp in Denmark is the only place German children feel comfortable practicing their religion. If Judaism in these countries cannot thrive, it is likely that in the future, they will struggle to survive.

Sehgal, Parul. “The Profound Emptiness of ‘Resilience.’” The New York Times. Dec. 1, 2015. Web. Dec. 4, 2015.

Last Lincoln Blog Corrected

Abraham Lincoln, in his Second Inaugural Address (1865), blames the sins and wrongdoings of the south for causing the war to fall upon the Americans. Lincoln insures that the south is at fault by pointing out that during his first inaugural address which promoted peace to save the nation, the south was doing the opposite, the south continued to own slaves, and the sin of slavery caused both the south and the north to be punished. Lincoln brings in the bible verse “Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh” in order to prove that the south’s transgressions brought “woe” onto all of America. Lincoln is reuniting America in and encouraging Americans to recognize that they are all apart of one country and one does something wrong, everyone suffers with them.

I agree with Lincoln for attempting to reunite America, but I disagree with his tactics. I understand that during his age, religion was a key factor, even in government, so I will not criticize him for not separating church and state. I do, however, disagree with him bringing up the point of everyone suffering, because of one groups’ sins. There is a common idea of everyone being on the same boat. When one person fails to row or sail correctly, everyone sinks. This is an idea I agree with, feel is important, try to practice in my daily life by taking responsibility for my own actions, and even see reflected in my religion. In Judaism, we have the phrase “כל ישראל ערבים זה לזה” which translates as “All of Israel are responsible for one another.” Even if I did not feel this way personally, this idea is a part of my religion and my everyday life, but I do not feel it had a place in Lincoln’s speech. Lincoln was speaking to the United States of America. Even though Americans should be united, both to achieve common goals and keep their national government structured, America is a land for everyone to have freedom. It is not on citizen's responsibility to look after a different citizen. People immigrated to America to start their own lives. I do not agree with the south’s decision of slavery, but a citizen should not have to feel that if he owns a slave, he is causing thousands of Americans to die at war. If he wants to feel this way, that is okay, but this view has no place in a speech by the leader of the country. This is similar to the constant argument over taxes. If someone who has a high income would want to donate money to the poor or government programs, that is amazing and I would do the same, but if America was founded so that people could live freely and equally, it is not fair to force those with higher incomes to pay for everyone else’s welfare. The south should not own slaves and people with high incomes should give money to the welfare of others, but the American government should not be telling people they have to.

Last Lincoln Blog

Abraham Lincoln, in his Second Inaugural Address (1865), points to the South as the cause of the Civil War, that has torn the country apart. Lincoln supports the idea that the South is at fault by bluntly addressing the issue of slavery, how slavery is against God’s will, and how the nation is now at war because of the South’s wrong doings. Abraham Lincoln bluntly states his arguments in order to show that war can no longer be prevented, and the South has long ago caused the war to begin. Lincoln is trying to make a statement to his audience that they should no longer strive for peace, but blame the South for the harsh war.

It is obvious to recognize that this speech is not like most of Lincoln’s speeches. In his past speeches we read, he was supporting what was best for America. Now, he is supporting what is best for the North. As president, an inaugural address, or any address, should discuss the issues of the country. While the war is an issue of the entire country, he clearly gives off the idea that he is speaking for the North, and not only is not helping the South, but is stirring up anger and problems for them. While he asked for peace in his last inaugural speech, he is now asking for war. It is understandable that his tone shifted from calm and friendly to harsh and blunt, but as a president, who is responsible for the whole country, he cannot shift from an American to a Northerner and outwardly express his anger towards the South. This is in no way going to solve the issues of the war and will only make the South angrier at the government and the north. While I do not support slavery at all, I do think that Lincoln should have addressed that it is not right, but not stating that it was the cause of the war and the South is at fault for all of the country's issues. He should have supported both sides of the country he is in charge of, not just one.

A Movement Has its Moments

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/opinion/a-movement-has-its-moment.html?ref=topics

Charles M. Blow, in “A Movement Has its Moments” (2015), supports the need for the Black Lives Matter campaign. Blow discusses the American idea of equality and justice through bringing in quotes from leading politicians and the preamble of the American Constitution and brings in a few quotes from those against the campaign towards the end. He uses the root idea of America of freedom and securing “the blessings of liberty” to show that those against the Black Lives Matter campaign are “un-American” and “ridiculous”. Blow is gaining support from Americans that are indifferent on the topic by turning them away from the anti-equality Americans that are against the Black Lives Matter campaign.

I fully agree with Blow that all Americans deserve equality, but I strongly disagree with the values, cases, and existence of the Black Lives Matter campaign and the points he made to support it. Although I recognize that the cases of police brutality and injustice commonly affect African Americans, I do not agree that these cases occur because the victims or people involved are African American. For a while in America, African Americans were considered lower class, despite their education level or occupation. We now live in a time where this is not true, but many African American families have still not yet picked themselves up and started successful careers and productive lifestyles. Because of this, It just so happens to be that the people living in lower income communities and what people call “sketchy” neighborhoods are African American. Although police should be better trained when entering these neighborhoods about how to make quick and life threatening decisions, they are doing their best and are never intentionally killing someone just because they are black. We are taught it is better to be safe than sorry, and these are the choices these police officers are dealing with. They are risking their lives and safety to enter these neighborhoods and are left to make difficult decisions in a quick amount of time. I do not think that any of these cases or occurring because they involve black people or because the black community is not treated the same way as white people.

Today, we live in a society where we have an African American president, our congressmen, doctors, athletes, and all other occupations are filled with people of different races, and African Americans are provided with every right that is granted to every citizen. I do not believe that the Black Lives Matter campaign needs to even exist, but if some people still feel there is a need to promote equality, there still could be a better way to go about it. Black Lives Matter has made it seem like the police, government officials, and America as a whole has been attacking and limiting the freedom of African Americans. Black Lives Matter was created to promote equality for African Americans, because they are being oppressed and are being treated unfairly. Their website states that we live in a world “where Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise.” They have supported events and protests in Ferguson and Baltimore last year and although they did not promote to take part in the violent protests, they did not discourage them and supported their cause. Blow made it seem that anyone who was against the Black Lives Matter campaign should be considered a hater of equality and American values, but I strongly disagree. I do not believe that supporting an organization that barely has a need for existence and promotes anger, and in cases, violence should be considered “un-American”.

Lessons From Lincoln in the Probable Government Shutdown

As the time deadline for Congress’s annual budget approaches, it seems more likely that disagreements in Congress will lead to another government shutdown, only two years after the government shutdown of 2013. This year, after videos releasing information of Planned Parenthood selling fetus parts, Congress has been arguing over refunding them. While this issue is one that is important to discuss, many citizens and politicians feel that it is not important enough to keep the government from functioning. If another government shutdown takes place, especially for such a small issue, the citizens, especially those working for the government or that benefit on a daily-basis from the federal government, will be very upset. It is the government’s job to take care of their people, and if they cannot agree and get things done, the people are left unhappy, frustrated, and out of order.

Abraham Lincoln speaks about a similar issue in an 1830 speech. He discusses the reasoning for the citizens becoming frustrated with an ineffective government; one that cannot compromise. Although today we do not have a clear solution to settle the arguments and behavior of an ineffective Congress, Lincoln had ideas about how to create peace and freedom in his day. In his speech, he spoke about how the people need to have a more mature look on the situation and compromise. He stated that humans “were either made to lie dormant, or to become the active agents in the advancement of the noblest cause--that of establishing and maintaining civil and religious liberty.” Perhaps we can take this lesson from Lincoln, and instead of arguing, which will lead to unhappy and uncontrollable citizens, Congress can compromise and get things done.

Blog 4: iLife

https://youtu.be/DZSBWbnmGrE?t=30s

Apple, in their ad entitled, “iLife (2006),” claims that owning a Mac computer increases the consumer’s options in terms of programs, and that using these programs creates a more enjoyable and organized computer experience. Apple supports this by using conversation to point out that opposed to using an iPod with just a PC, Macs deliver a number of other applications, including iMovie, iPhoto, and iWeb, and also uses logical arguments to contrast a Mac with a PC, including the fact that the PC’s only thrilling feature is a calculator. Apple’s purpose is to excite consumers about the options a Mac offers, in order to persuade them to buy a Mac. Apple speaks to all consumers across the spectrum, including both prospective Mac owners and current PC owners, to get all sides to switch to a Mac.

Nicholas Kristof "Refugees Who Could Be Us"

Nicholas Kristof, in “Refugees Who Could Be Us” (2015), blames the global community for not taking earlier actions to solve the problems in Syria. Kristof brings up examples of the suffering that Syrians have gone through, the fact that they have no safe zone, and the fact that these issues have not been fixed by leading countries, such as the United States and European countries, despite the fact that the Syrian Civil War has been taking place for four years. The author brings attention to the vulnerability Aylan Kurdi and other Syrian refugees in order to gain sympathy and help for those wanting to live peaceful lives. Kristof instills a sense of guilt into the reader for not have noticing the issues going on in Syria and encourages them to recognize the issue of not assisting the refugees.

Throughout Kristof’s article, I admired the fact that he decided to take lessons from the past to help persuade his audience to want to help the Syrian refugees. The main issue that Kristof brings up, in regards to the Syrian refugees,  is the fact that people are not helping and are being unsympathetic to refugees who are not being given easy access to European countries. He began his article by bringing up the past of his family and suggesting that readers research their ancestor’s lives as refugees. He also brings up the history of the Jews in the Holocaust that tried to flee to America, another time in history where refugees were ignored and suffered greatly because of it. World leaders, especially the United States which is a country founded as a place where all humankind can live equally, should step up to help the refugees. If nations of the world do not provide homes and care for these people, they are helpless and have no choice but to return to their dangerous home, like the Jews during the Holocaust. I think that it is a great idea for people to reflect on the past to see that these refugees cannot be sent away or ignored, because their lives will be lost if they are not taken in by other countries.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/06/opinion/sunday/nicholas-kristof-refugees-who-could-be-us.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fnicholas-kristof

Lessons from the Virginia Shooting

Nicholas Kristof in “Lessons From the Virginia Shooting” (2015), implies that the recent Virginia shooting was able to happen because of the lax gun regulations in the United States. Kristof uses the example of what happened in Virginia and other data showing gun violence in the country to prove that having stricter gun laws in America is crucial to the safety and survival of the citizens. Kristof states that there are more regulations towards toys, ladders, and swimming pools than there are towards guns to prove that gun violence is being ignored. Kristof is telling all Americans how crucial it is that we push for stricter gun laws for the safety of everyone in the country.

I agree with Kristoff. Guns are weapons that are made to kill and it is often that they end up in the hands of those that are dangerous. It is understandable that some may want a gun for protection, safety, or hunting, but there need to be strict regulations to make sure they do not get into the wrong hands. There are many solutions to this issue of too many dangerous people with guns. One solution is stricter background checks, especially at flea markets that travel through towns and do not do background checks. There can also be safes or passcode locks on guns, which is an idea Kristoff discussed. I still remember the details of the incident in Sandy Hook Elementary School, that occurred a few years ago. This is also an incident where guns fell into the hands of the wrong person, but this time it was not just a gun, but assault rifles. I can understand that people should have the right to a gun, but I do not understand why it is that peopel are allowed to own assault rifles. It is unnecessary and extremely dangerous and should not have costed the lives of twenty-six people in an elementary school.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/27/opinion/lessons-from-the-murders-of-tv-journalists-in-the-virginia-shooting.html?_r=1

Cecil the Lion

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/30/us/walter-palmer-whereabouts/

After reading the article about Cecil the lion, I was very disturbed by both the actions of Dr. Palmer and the reactions of the people. The fact that Dr. Palmer would do such a thing upsets me and makes me question whether or not hunting for sport should be legal, due to the fact that it is just unnecessary and inhumane. Hunting for deer is one thing, because people may use it for meat and food, but to kill a lion for no reason upsets me. What also bothered me was the reaction of the people. I understood that people were upset and should have spoken up about it, but the people got so aggressive and violent after hearing this news.

Dr. Palmer, whether or not he did know he was on a preserve and it was an accident, took many actions that disturbed me in this incident. First of all, when hunting or holding a weapon, one should be very aware of his surroundings. The fact that he was not careful enough while holding a weapon and hunting worries me. If an “accident” like this can happen, maybe hunting for a sport is too dangerous and should not be allowed. It also bothered me that he used a weapon that would make the lion suffer for days before dying. It is unnecessary and I do not understand why someone would need to hunt a lion in the first place and I especially do not understand why someone would cause it to suffer.

Although I am very upset by this news, I was also upset by the reaction of the public. Martin Luther King once said, “Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that.” I think that this quote explains why the people should not have become so aggressive when hearing this news. If a person is so disappointed and upset about this act of violence, they should not react in harmful ways to bring justice. Instead, the public could have responded in a way that was more peaceful and helpful. They could have responded through protests and kind letters to authoritative figures, rather than threatening Dr. Palmer and his office. Overall, I was shocked by the acts of everyone involved. The fact that someone would murder an animal for no reason, especially one that was on a preserve, and the fact that people react in such a hateful way disturbs me.