Of those currently running, who is the best candidate for President?
The 2008 Campaign is upon us, and as the Iowa Caucus quickly approaches it is time for you to vote. Please answer the question above. You need to justify your selection with specifics, not generalizations. Additionally, make sure to vote in the Presidential Poll on the blog main page.
Trying to find out who is "stretching the truth"? Consider checking out this website...
http://www.factcheck.org/
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
A Political Coward
Recently, former Arkansas Governor and current candidate for the Republican nomination Mike Huckabee was asked about former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney's Mormon religion. Two months ago this question would have been meaningless. However, Huckabee has surged in the Iowa polls and now threatens Romney's once certain victory in the Iowa caucuses. Huckabee was asked whether he believed Mormonism is a "cult." Instead of answering the question he stated that it was not an appropriate question. Come on Governor! There is one answer to that question, "No, I do not believe Mormonism is a 'cult.'" So why didn't he say that? Because Huckabee knows that much of his support comes from an uneasiness many evangelicals have with the Mormon faith. Thus, instead of showcasing a moral spine by distancing himself from the religious tests many evangelicals are putting Romney through, he simply plays to it.
But for Huckabee it does not end there. The next day he was asked if creationism should be taught in public school science classes. He once again said that the question was inappropriate. Interesting, a man who continually professes to be a evangelical Christian to friendly audiences is unwilling to answer simple questions based on his beliefs that actually affect governmental policy. If a candidate is going to run on religion then the voters have a right to know what religious beliefs that candidate holds. Let's be candid Governor, you won't answer these questions because they will expose you for what you are: either a man who cynically uses religion for political gain, or a man who holds religious beliefs he does not want to expose to the public.
Prove me wrong Governor! Be candid! And answer the questions!
But for Huckabee it does not end there. The next day he was asked if creationism should be taught in public school science classes. He once again said that the question was inappropriate. Interesting, a man who continually professes to be a evangelical Christian to friendly audiences is unwilling to answer simple questions based on his beliefs that actually affect governmental policy. If a candidate is going to run on religion then the voters have a right to know what religious beliefs that candidate holds. Let's be candid Governor, you won't answer these questions because they will expose you for what you are: either a man who cynically uses religion for political gain, or a man who holds religious beliefs he does not want to expose to the public.
Prove me wrong Governor! Be candid! And answer the questions!
Sunday, December 2, 2007
An Immigration Nation?
Immigration has always been an essential characteristic of the American nation. The United States has long prided itself as a country defined as a "melting-pot" or a "garden salad." In other words, a place where diverse cultural, religious, and ethnic groups come together to forge an entirely new society unique to the world. However, while immigration has often been viewed as a positive attribute for the U.S., it has repeatedly raised the natural fear all people have of "others" or "them."
The 2008 presidential campaign has increasingly been dominated by this once non-salient political issue. As comprehensive immigration reform has repeatedly stalled in the Senate (even with President Bush's support) and as states have taken unilateral steps to deal with the influx of illegal immigrants; the patience of many American citizens is seemingly wearing thin.
What does this renewed interest in the immigration issue say about the United States and the state of our politics? Is immigration (legal or illegal) as big of a problem as some voters make it out to be? What are the advantages and disadvantages of restricting immigration? What are the realistic solutions to this very contentious issue?
Please use the two readings below to guide you in your response. After reading both, address the questions above in a post. Please refer to the articles specifically in your post and comment on the historical nature of this debate (is it new or old to the American story).
Joel Klein, Time
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1688794,00.html
Tamar Jacoby, Foreign Affairs
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20061101faessay85606/tamar-jacoby/immigration-nation.html
The 2008 presidential campaign has increasingly been dominated by this once non-salient political issue. As comprehensive immigration reform has repeatedly stalled in the Senate (even with President Bush's support) and as states have taken unilateral steps to deal with the influx of illegal immigrants; the patience of many American citizens is seemingly wearing thin.
What does this renewed interest in the immigration issue say about the United States and the state of our politics? Is immigration (legal or illegal) as big of a problem as some voters make it out to be? What are the advantages and disadvantages of restricting immigration? What are the realistic solutions to this very contentious issue?
Please use the two readings below to guide you in your response. After reading both, address the questions above in a post. Please refer to the articles specifically in your post and comment on the historical nature of this debate (is it new or old to the American story).
Joel Klein, Time
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1688794,00.html
Tamar Jacoby, Foreign Affairs
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20061101faessay85606/tamar-jacoby/immigration-nation.html
Good News from Iraq
The monthly death tolls continue to decrease in Iraq. The November death tolls for U.S. military personnel and Iraqi citizens hit close to two year lows. This is clear evidence that the military surge is working. The increase of 30,000 troops has been able to increase security in Iraq to the point that Iraqi refugees, who once fled the violence, are now returning. While I personally remain skeptical of the Iraqi mission, there have certainly been positive developments over the last three months.
Yet these developments beg certain questions. What happens as the surge ends (the additional 30,000 troops are already in the process of drawing down)? Why has the decrease in violence not resulted in any political progress in the Maliki government? Is maintaining 160,000 U.S. troops in the country, the only way to maintain relative security? Finally, if the recent military successes are due to the increase in troops then doesn't the President have to answer for why it took nearly three years to develop this unoriginal plan?
Yet these developments beg certain questions. What happens as the surge ends (the additional 30,000 troops are already in the process of drawing down)? Why has the decrease in violence not resulted in any political progress in the Maliki government? Is maintaining 160,000 U.S. troops in the country, the only way to maintain relative security? Finally, if the recent military successes are due to the increase in troops then doesn't the President have to answer for why it took nearly three years to develop this unoriginal plan?
Read this story to learn more...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071202/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_casualties;_ylt=AmOqKzhuheTeQAJ4UuaKJFYLewgF
Watch this video to learn more...
Sports Thoughts
A few thoughts on the weeks events...
Flyer Basketball: My UD Flyers are 5-1 after surviving two close games this week. With a 63-62 victory over Miami and a 55-53 win over Holy Cross, the Flyers are showing an ability lacking in the past...win the close ones on the road. Despite this recent success, I am still wary of the season to come. Potential trouble spots still yet to play in non-conference: Louisville, Pittsburg, and Akron. BG has a lot to prove this year and at least for me, 2007-2008 is the do-or-die for season for him.
College Football: What a joke the BCS is! How can any team claim to be the national champion this year. OSU, the new #1, is undeserving in my opinion to play for the national title, however, the other contenders do little to support my opinion. Honestly, can anyone say that OSU is more deserving to play in the game than Georgia, Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, and USC? What a mess, so easily solved by a playoff system!
Flyer Basketball: My UD Flyers are 5-1 after surviving two close games this week. With a 63-62 victory over Miami and a 55-53 win over Holy Cross, the Flyers are showing an ability lacking in the past...win the close ones on the road. Despite this recent success, I am still wary of the season to come. Potential trouble spots still yet to play in non-conference: Louisville, Pittsburg, and Akron. BG has a lot to prove this year and at least for me, 2007-2008 is the do-or-die for season for him.
College Football: What a joke the BCS is! How can any team claim to be the national champion this year. OSU, the new #1, is undeserving in my opinion to play for the national title, however, the other contenders do little to support my opinion. Honestly, can anyone say that OSU is more deserving to play in the game than Georgia, Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, and USC? What a mess, so easily solved by a playoff system!
Friday, November 23, 2007
Evaluating Barbara
In her last chapter of Nickel and Dimed, Barbara Ehrenreich evaluates her experiment to survive on minimum wage. She highlights a number of challenges that continually face the working poor. In addition, she provides her own explanation for what is holding the working poor back from economic success and security.
Please identify the challenges facing the working poor as explained by Ehrenreich. Then assess her explanation of the obstacles facing the poor. Finally, provide you own evaluation for how our society treats or deals with those living in poverty.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Enough with the fake outrage!!!
As our economy falters, our troops fight two wars, and millions of Americans continue to live without health insurance; our political leaders and noise machine media focus on the important issues: patriotism. I for one am sick of both political parties trying to prove which one is more patriotic. This constant quest for one-up-manship drives Republicans and Democrats to focus on the mundane and unimportant. But why? Why do both parties continue to focus on this patriotism competition?
There are two answers. First, neither party can force their ideological driven vision on all Americans. With Congress closely divided and an unpopular President, both parties are frustrated with their own inabilities. Due to their failure to compromise (or simply a lack of real ideas) politicans are driven to issues that have no real impact. But why patriotism? This is where the second answer comes into play: too many Americans buy into it. If we would demand more from our government; if we would demand more from Washington; if we were not so easily distracted from the real problems our nation faces, and actually demanded something, then maybe things would change in Washington.
Up to now, I have discounted the notions that 2008 was a "throw the bums" out election. Yet, as it becomes clear that Congress and the President have no idea as to what to do to help the American people, I am slowing becoming convinced that Washington has to change. However, that change must begin in the living rooms of America.
There are two answers. First, neither party can force their ideological driven vision on all Americans. With Congress closely divided and an unpopular President, both parties are frustrated with their own inabilities. Due to their failure to compromise (or simply a lack of real ideas) politicans are driven to issues that have no real impact. But why patriotism? This is where the second answer comes into play: too many Americans buy into it. If we would demand more from our government; if we would demand more from Washington; if we were not so easily distracted from the real problems our nation faces, and actually demanded something, then maybe things would change in Washington.
Up to now, I have discounted the notions that 2008 was a "throw the bums" out election. Yet, as it becomes clear that Congress and the President have no idea as to what to do to help the American people, I am slowing becoming convinced that Washington has to change. However, that change must begin in the living rooms of America.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Is the media driving this race???
After watching countless hours of media coverage about the race for the Democratic nomination, I was left to ask the question: Is the media driving this race? As Sen. Clinton emerged in late October with a seemingly insurmountable lead in the polls, the media began to build up her chief opponent, Sen. Obama. By simply watching the talking heads, it was clear that the media wanted a story. An inevitable Clinton victory was boring. That surely would not "sell." But what always sells? Conflict! The news markets wanted a story they could sell and so used their influence to create such a story. The Daily Show captured my thoughts perfectly. After watching the clip below, just ask yourself: Was there any doubt that Obama was going to be declared the winner of the debate in Philadelphia?
Saturday, November 17, 2007
The Logical Tax Debate
As the President and Congress lock horns over federal spending and tax law, the American middle-class continues to lose. Without legislative reforms, millions of middle-class Americans will be subject to the AMT, which was originally designed to catch millionaires who were not paying their fair share of taxes.
At a time when Republicans are championing calls of patriotism and accusing Democrats of not "supporting the troops" the party of the President needs to reevaluate their patriotic duties. In his weekly radio address, President Bush demanded Congress pass AMT tax reform. His call was the right one, but like he so often does, President Bush mixes a sound principle with unsound specifics. In the same breath in which he calls for tax help for the middle-class, he treatened to veto any AMT reform that raised other taxes to pay for the loss in revenue. So basically, President Bush wants tax reform for the middle-class but not at the expense of large corporations and hedgefund manager, who make millions of dollars.
The President and his congressional allies are therefore asking for middle-class tax reform, but don't want to increase taxes on the super-rich to pay for that lost revenue. But, if taxes are not raised, where will the difference by made up? In reduced social program spending of course. But this spending supports many of the social programs favored and supported by middle-class Americans.
It is time for the Democratic Party to abandon its policies of pandering to select interest groups and frame 2008 as an election built on saving the middle-class. Front and center of this election strategy must be the tax issue. Democrats must get middle-class Americans to ask themselves, why should I support a political party so irrationally against taxes? No one likes taxes, but they are a matter of necessity for any post-industrialized society. Therefore, why should those most able to pay and contribute not be asked to provide their fair share? It is the business executives, bankers, stockbrockers, and hedgefund managers who reap the most benefit from the American economy. They receive disproportionate rewards and therefore they should pay disproportionate costs.
While Republicans have adopted the belief that the only way to be patriotic is to pay out $800 billion for a war without question, they should have already lost the political debate. But Democrats have failed to frame the issue. Tax policy needs to be framed in a patriotic context. Through true and revolutionary tax reform, true change can be achieved.
As Thomas Friedman wrote, in his support for a gasoline tax...
"I can't believe that someone could not win the following debate:
Republican Candidate: 'My Democratic opponent, true to form, wants to raise your taxes. Yes, now he wants to raise your taxes at the gasoline pump by $1 a gallon. Another tax-and-spend liberal who wants to get into your pocket'
Democratic Candidate: 'Yes, my opponent is right. I do favor a gasoline tax phased in over 12 months. But let's get one thing straight: My opponent and I are both for a tax. I just prefer that my taxes go to the U.S. Treasury, and he's ready to see his go to the Russian, Venezuelan, Saudi and Iranian treasuries. His tax finances people who hate us. Mine would offset some of our payroll taxes, pay down our deficit, strengthen our dollar, stimulate energy efficiency and shore up Social Security. Its called win-win-win-win-win for America. My opponent's strategy is sit back, let the market work and watch America lose-lose-lose-lose-lose.'"
How does anyone lose that political debate???
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071117/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush
At a time when Republicans are championing calls of patriotism and accusing Democrats of not "supporting the troops" the party of the President needs to reevaluate their patriotic duties. In his weekly radio address, President Bush demanded Congress pass AMT tax reform. His call was the right one, but like he so often does, President Bush mixes a sound principle with unsound specifics. In the same breath in which he calls for tax help for the middle-class, he treatened to veto any AMT reform that raised other taxes to pay for the loss in revenue. So basically, President Bush wants tax reform for the middle-class but not at the expense of large corporations and hedgefund manager, who make millions of dollars.
The President and his congressional allies are therefore asking for middle-class tax reform, but don't want to increase taxes on the super-rich to pay for that lost revenue. But, if taxes are not raised, where will the difference by made up? In reduced social program spending of course. But this spending supports many of the social programs favored and supported by middle-class Americans.
It is time for the Democratic Party to abandon its policies of pandering to select interest groups and frame 2008 as an election built on saving the middle-class. Front and center of this election strategy must be the tax issue. Democrats must get middle-class Americans to ask themselves, why should I support a political party so irrationally against taxes? No one likes taxes, but they are a matter of necessity for any post-industrialized society. Therefore, why should those most able to pay and contribute not be asked to provide their fair share? It is the business executives, bankers, stockbrockers, and hedgefund managers who reap the most benefit from the American economy. They receive disproportionate rewards and therefore they should pay disproportionate costs.
While Republicans have adopted the belief that the only way to be patriotic is to pay out $800 billion for a war without question, they should have already lost the political debate. But Democrats have failed to frame the issue. Tax policy needs to be framed in a patriotic context. Through true and revolutionary tax reform, true change can be achieved.
As Thomas Friedman wrote, in his support for a gasoline tax...
"I can't believe that someone could not win the following debate:
Republican Candidate: 'My Democratic opponent, true to form, wants to raise your taxes. Yes, now he wants to raise your taxes at the gasoline pump by $1 a gallon. Another tax-and-spend liberal who wants to get into your pocket'
Democratic Candidate: 'Yes, my opponent is right. I do favor a gasoline tax phased in over 12 months. But let's get one thing straight: My opponent and I are both for a tax. I just prefer that my taxes go to the U.S. Treasury, and he's ready to see his go to the Russian, Venezuelan, Saudi and Iranian treasuries. His tax finances people who hate us. Mine would offset some of our payroll taxes, pay down our deficit, strengthen our dollar, stimulate energy efficiency and shore up Social Security. Its called win-win-win-win-win for America. My opponent's strategy is sit back, let the market work and watch America lose-lose-lose-lose-lose.'"
How does anyone lose that political debate???
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071117/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Working Minimum Wage in Maine
Detail what occurred in Chapter 2. Make sure to discuss the events, people, and struggles that Barbara meets. In addition, offer any insights or conclusions that Barbara provides. Make sure to provide textual evidence to justify your response.
Saturday, November 10, 2007
What's in a Word?
The United States is currently engaged in a national discussion revolved around our conduct in the War on Terror. Central to this discussion is the question of torture. Should the U.S. use torture against the enemy in an effort to retrieve information? Is torture an effective method of intelligence gathering? Would allowing the U.S. Armed Forces or the intelligence agencies (CIA) undermine our moral principles or hurt our international image? These are tough questions, made tougher by our government's seeming inability to talk straight to us.
Jon Stewart recently discussed this very same topic on the Daily Show. Watch the embedded video and offer your thoughts.
Jon Stewart recently discussed this very same topic on the Daily Show. Watch the embedded video and offer your thoughts.
Is She Accurate?
Nickel and Dimed
When Barbara Ehrenreich published Nickel and Dimed in 2001 she was met by praise and criticism. Nickel and Dimed has engendered suppport and comtemnation depending on one's perspective.
Based on your reading of the book so far, post your thoughts and reactions to Ehrenreich's mission and message.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
What to do in Pakistan?
The Risky Dance with Pakistan As the nation of Pakistan teeters on the edge of chaos, the United States is left with difficult questions.
Does the Bush Administration support its ally in the War on Terror, President Musharraf? Should the United States support immediate democratic reforms and the popular appeal of Benazir Bhutto?
It is clear that the U.S. is left with few good options in this situation. Musharraf seems to represent at least some semblance of stability in a volatile region. On the other hand, the U.S. risks losing the moral high ground as it promotes "democracy" in Iraq but denies it in Pakistan.
What is the proper course of action for the United States?
Saturday, November 3, 2007
What Should Congressmen Do?
In the study of political science there is a fiece debate as to the proper role of congressmen. Some believe Senators and Representatives should act as delegates, merely representing the views of their constituents. Others argue that these men and women are elected because voters trust their judgement and therefore they should simply vote their conscience and fulfill a trustee model. Other political scientists have tried to combine the two views into a compromise called Politico(some people would call this cowardly).
Your questions: What did Edmund Burke say about this topic (refer to your reading)? Second, what is your personal belief? Which is the proper role for members of Congress: trustee, delegate, or politico? Justify and support your answer.
Your questions: What did Edmund Burke say about this topic (refer to your reading)? Second, what is your personal belief? Which is the proper role for members of Congress: trustee, delegate, or politico? Justify and support your answer.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Best Movie of the Summer?
Hairspray - Hairspray accomplishes what too few summer movies do - namely entertain while sending a message. This remake of the 1988 film and the 2003 Broadway musical is quite simply fun and uplifting. Admittedly, I have a long built-in bias for musicals (there is just something about the ability of any crowd to burst into coordinated song and dance). The appeal is clear, there are many things that are said better with song. However, what marks Hairspray's success is its balancing act. Within the context of bubble-gum songs and the angst of teenage actors the movie addresses the pure racism of the 1960s and the purity of youth to save society. As revisionists attempt to paint this era as one of innocence and prosperity, we are reminded it was a fictional innocence that masked the ugly nature of racism. The message is simple - and sadly still needed - acceptance and tolerance. And who leads this crusade? Teenagers. Why? Because they still possess a combination of naivete and idealism. Hairspray succeeds where Dreamgirls and Chicago failed by simply sending a serious message while not taking itself too seriously. Grade: A-
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Summer Movie Update
It has been awhile since I last updated this blog so here it goes...
Spiderman 3: It took me two months to see this movie, but when I finally did in a questionable discount theater I was impressed. Critics, upon its release, had soured to this trilogy. Spiderman 2 had been greeted with high praise as the embodiment of perfect summer action. Spiderman 2 was a great film, but the criticism voiced against Spiderman 3 is misplaced. I found the story line believable and who honestly did not like to see Tobey turn evil (at least for a fleeting moment). Additionally, the action sequences were excellent as always and Topher Grace finally got what was coming to him. Grade B
Sicko: In one of my rare adventures to an "indie" theater, I viewed Michael Moore's most recent message picture. (On a side note, indie films are where true acting lives but often goes unseen. But maybe this is not because Americans are unintelligent - as some suggest - but rather because indie theaters are just sort of scary?) Sicko is a powerful picture. Moore comes with considerable baggage and many people see the messenger and write off the message. This is a mistake. While the movie's beginning is rough, it soon settles down into a compelling and depressing portrayal of our nation's healthcare system. All Americans should see this movie, for the message and questions are too great to ignore. Even if you disagree with Bowling for Columbine and were angered by the assertions in Fahrenheit 9/11, you are not above this debate. Moore's movie clearly has an agenda and while you may disagree with his ideology he raises one simple yet powerful question: Is healthcare a right only reserved for those who can pay for it? To this can be added hundreds of personal thoughts, yet I will leave it as this: Is it an "American value" to allow middle class families to lose everything because some HMO won't pay for a life and death surgery? It is bad enough when 40 million Americans do not have health insurance, but worse when those who have paid for insurance still get denied necessary coverage! Grade B
Transformers: Incredible action scenes, talking robots, and a movie based on a cartoon and toys that fed my youthful imagination - enough said...Great! Grade B
Spiderman 3: It took me two months to see this movie, but when I finally did in a questionable discount theater I was impressed. Critics, upon its release, had soured to this trilogy. Spiderman 2 had been greeted with high praise as the embodiment of perfect summer action. Spiderman 2 was a great film, but the criticism voiced against Spiderman 3 is misplaced. I found the story line believable and who honestly did not like to see Tobey turn evil (at least for a fleeting moment). Additionally, the action sequences were excellent as always and Topher Grace finally got what was coming to him. Grade B
Sicko: In one of my rare adventures to an "indie" theater, I viewed Michael Moore's most recent message picture. (On a side note, indie films are where true acting lives but often goes unseen. But maybe this is not because Americans are unintelligent - as some suggest - but rather because indie theaters are just sort of scary?) Sicko is a powerful picture. Moore comes with considerable baggage and many people see the messenger and write off the message. This is a mistake. While the movie's beginning is rough, it soon settles down into a compelling and depressing portrayal of our nation's healthcare system. All Americans should see this movie, for the message and questions are too great to ignore. Even if you disagree with Bowling for Columbine and were angered by the assertions in Fahrenheit 9/11, you are not above this debate. Moore's movie clearly has an agenda and while you may disagree with his ideology he raises one simple yet powerful question: Is healthcare a right only reserved for those who can pay for it? To this can be added hundreds of personal thoughts, yet I will leave it as this: Is it an "American value" to allow middle class families to lose everything because some HMO won't pay for a life and death surgery? It is bad enough when 40 million Americans do not have health insurance, but worse when those who have paid for insurance still get denied necessary coverage! Grade B
Transformers: Incredible action scenes, talking robots, and a movie based on a cartoon and toys that fed my youthful imagination - enough said...Great! Grade B
Monday, June 4, 2007
Pirates...
Let us hope this is the end of this trilogy. POTC:AWE represents the perfect example of Hollywood's desperate need for cash. Instead of developing a story and then a movie, this was the process in reverse. Clearly they wanted a movie and who cares about the story. Who needs a coherent storyline, character development, or even quality acting when you can drown the audience in millions of gallons of water and special effects. POTC: TCBP was a high quality movie because it was clever and brought to the screen something audiences had not seen before. It combined an authentic nature, a flawed yet lovable hero, and action. As moviegoers, we should demand higher quality movie making before the pursuit of money overwhelms and destroys another franchise. Can Ocean's 13 succeed where Spiderman 3, Shrek 3, and Pirates 3 failed? Who knows, but it does have one thing going for it...a second film that set a very low floor.
Summer Reading Assignments
I have created forum pages for the Honors Government and AP US History classes on the mcpedia site. You can access these forum pages from the class pages. You should post any problems, questions, comments or insights you have on these pages.
Honors Government: all four assignments for Culture War? have now been posted. Please access them on the mcpedia site.
AP US History: Please post the title, author, and subject of your chosen book on the AP US History Forum page on the mcpedia site.
Honors Government: all four assignments for Culture War? have now been posted. Please access them on the mcpedia site.
AP US History: Please post the title, author, and subject of your chosen book on the AP US History Forum page on the mcpedia site.
Sunday, May 6, 2007
Monday, April 23, 2007
The Trade Debate
Honors Government: (Due 4/25/07)
Our nation (along with many industrialized nations) is dealing with an intense trade debate. Should our government promote the principles of free trade or should the government protect domestic producers from foreign competition? Please read the trade debate packet and address the following issue.
1) In your own words, describe the trade debate.
2) Which side has the better argument? Why?
3) Where do you stand on the issue?
Our nation (along with many industrialized nations) is dealing with an intense trade debate. Should our government promote the principles of free trade or should the government protect domestic producers from foreign competition? Please read the trade debate packet and address the following issue.
1) In your own words, describe the trade debate.
2) Which side has the better argument? Why?
3) Where do you stand on the issue?
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Political Ad Contest
Explore the Political Ad links on the right hand side of the blog. Then write a post explaining which one you find the most effective. Make sure to cite specific details about the ad that contribute to its perceived success.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
The Role of Government
Honors Government -
For Thursday, read the essay by Milton Friedman and respond to this post by answering the following questions:
1) What is the general message of Friedman's essay?
2) According to Friedman, what is the proper role of government in the economy? Be specific.
3) Do you personally agree with his view? Why or why not? Note: your answer should be read as your personal economic philosophy, so make sure it is clear and specific.
Interesting story about Milton Friedman:
Thursday, April 12, 2007
The Lessons of Don Imus
In the past two weeks, the media has been discussing, debating, and condemning radio personality Don Imus. All this attention is centered around comments Mr. Imus made in reference to the Rutgers Women's basketball team on his morning show, Imus in the Morning. I will assume that all will agree that what he said was offensive and below a standard of decency that Mr. Imus should have for himself. To Mr. Imus' defense, he has continually and repeatedly apologized for his statement and has even offered to meet with the Rutgers team. However, no matter what one's opinions are about the attention and punishment Imus is receiving this whole episode has revealed five very important lessons for us to consider.
1) Words do matter - Words (especially words expressed across the airwaves) have true power. Words can inform, enlighten, and in this case hurt. Imus, who has built his career on words is now suffering from them. Thus, Ladies and Gentlemen choose your words carefully.
2) Sorry only goes so far - This entire episode leads to this 2nd observation and lesson. Our society has seemingly developed the belief that the word "sorry" heals all wounds. It doesn't. Sorry is a hard word to say and it is honorable because it reveals that an individual acknowledges wrong. However, sorry does not undue. Forgiveness is divine but we mere mortals cannot be expected to be divine all the time.
3) Money drives all - MSNBC announced yesterday that it would be dropping the Imus in the Morning show. Many applauded the move. However, it is unclear if MSNBC was driven by some high ideal against racist/sexist speech or by the fact that its corporate sponsors were pulling their advertising dollars out of Imus' show. No matter the motivation, the lesson is clear: if you are angry and want change head straight to where the money is...advertising.
4) Even the smallest actions have consequences - Don Imus has been on radio for decades and has been on TV for 11 years. He has raised tens of millions of dollars for child disease research and veterans. He operates a ranch for children dying of cancer. He has done and continues to do good works. Yet, none of this matters now. His current struggle is driven by three words delivered in less than 3 seconds. Here is a hard lesson to learn: no matter how good you are, no matter how much good you do, don't let small actions ruin you, because they will if you commit them.
5) Perception matters - Imus has repeatedly claimed that he is not a sexist or a racist. But that claim does not matter. It does not matter if you are not truly a racist or a sexist. What matters is the perception that others have of you. We live in a highly social and (thanks Tom Friedman) "flat" world. You might be the nicest person on earth but if others perceive you as mean, then you are mean. It may not be fair but it is how the world functions. As a famous Republican pollster Frank Luntz writes, "It's not what you say, it's what people hear." Pay attention to how people perceive you. Don't be fake but make sure your actions and words accurately reflect who you are or who you want to be.
1) Words do matter - Words (especially words expressed across the airwaves) have true power. Words can inform, enlighten, and in this case hurt. Imus, who has built his career on words is now suffering from them. Thus, Ladies and Gentlemen choose your words carefully.
2) Sorry only goes so far - This entire episode leads to this 2nd observation and lesson. Our society has seemingly developed the belief that the word "sorry" heals all wounds. It doesn't. Sorry is a hard word to say and it is honorable because it reveals that an individual acknowledges wrong. However, sorry does not undue. Forgiveness is divine but we mere mortals cannot be expected to be divine all the time.
3) Money drives all - MSNBC announced yesterday that it would be dropping the Imus in the Morning show. Many applauded the move. However, it is unclear if MSNBC was driven by some high ideal against racist/sexist speech or by the fact that its corporate sponsors were pulling their advertising dollars out of Imus' show. No matter the motivation, the lesson is clear: if you are angry and want change head straight to where the money is...advertising.
4) Even the smallest actions have consequences - Don Imus has been on radio for decades and has been on TV for 11 years. He has raised tens of millions of dollars for child disease research and veterans. He operates a ranch for children dying of cancer. He has done and continues to do good works. Yet, none of this matters now. His current struggle is driven by three words delivered in less than 3 seconds. Here is a hard lesson to learn: no matter how good you are, no matter how much good you do, don't let small actions ruin you, because they will if you commit them.
5) Perception matters - Imus has repeatedly claimed that he is not a sexist or a racist. But that claim does not matter. It does not matter if you are not truly a racist or a sexist. What matters is the perception that others have of you. We live in a highly social and (thanks Tom Friedman) "flat" world. You might be the nicest person on earth but if others perceive you as mean, then you are mean. It may not be fair but it is how the world functions. As a famous Republican pollster Frank Luntz writes, "It's not what you say, it's what people hear." Pay attention to how people perceive you. Don't be fake but make sure your actions and words accurately reflect who you are or who you want to be.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
300 Review
I recently saw the movie, 300, and was a bit disappointed. Many of my students had showered this movie with high praise; some even declaring that it was now their "favorite movie." While I found the special effects to be amazing, the battle scenes uniquely done (I don't think I have ever seen a battle scene decapitation slowed down), and the movie to be truly "beautiful" in imagery; it was lacking. It took awhile to come to a full realization of what that missing element was but eventually epiphany hit. On its surface, it was missing something quite simple, yet so necessary to any movie, a sympathetic hero. While the movie made it clear who it wanted the hero (Spartans) and the villain (King Xerxes and the Persians) to be, I was left unconvinced. While the Persians were made into something to be despised, I can't say I looked fondly toward the Spartans.
What really is to be admired about a civilization that killed its weakest members, taught its young to steal, and was built entirely on war and violence? Furthermore, I find it interesting that the Spartans fought for "freedom" yet were all too willing to enslave anyone who was not "Spartan." Yet, it is their thirst for war and combat that I find the most distasteful. In one scene, a Spartan warrior, looking upon the massing Persian horde is seen smiling. He goes on to explain that it is his wish that someone within that massive enemy force will give him what he has dreamt of, a proper warrior's death. Well to put it simply: his dream comes true as he and is companions are cut down by those evil Persians.
Finally, it is hard to look past the accidental or purposeful political analogies located throughout the movie. The formula is basic: west : good :: east : evil. The Spartans and the broader Greek forces of the movie are the west (US) battling for everything good in the world: freedom and liberty. Meanwhile the Persians (Muslims, Iran, etc.) are fighting for conquest and to destroy the Greek (western) world. King Xerxes is portrayed almost as the devil offering temptations to the Spartan King if he will but join the Persian crusade. Yet, the movie could also be read as a warning if one were to switch the analogy. The Persians because of the arrogance of their leader underestimate their enemy. They are the greatest military force ever assembled and no small nation can defeat them in open battle. But an enemy (as the Spartans show), no matter how small, is greatly strengthened when fighting for their own freedom and against a force seen as a conqueror and occupier. Perhaps the hidden lesson in this movie is not to fight the "east" with all cost, but rather to avoid the arrogant belief that through military force you can change the world into what you believe it should be.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
