For roughly the past month now, there have been many protests in the Wisconsin State Capitol in Madison over Governor Scott Walker's controversial move to suspend unions' rights to a collective bargaining agreement, among other things. Because of these actions, fourteen of the Wisconsin Senate Democrats have fled the state in an attempt to change Governor Walker's opinion. Despite many protesters currently working to stop this from happening, Governor Walker appears to be winning and has shown no indication of revoking this movement.
More recently, Governor Walker issued an ultimatum, saying that if the Democratic senators do not return to work soon, there will be many job firings of state employees. This firm statement makes many people believe that Governor Walker is not being tolerant enough and should attempt to compromise. Many have even called Walker's action "dictatorial". I have disagree with these statements. Governor Walker's response is justified because of the actions by the Wisconsin state representatives that precipitated it. The purpose of a democratic government is for full representation by the people. So when these elected officials leave the state in order to not fulfill their duty, they are completely disobeying their job.
I have heard many liberals who do not support Walker claim that because of his supposed iron-fist on the matter of trimming the budget, it has shown that he is not willing to move from his position. The opposite is actually true, as Walker has made it clear that he is willing to have civil discussions about improving his plans reduce the state deficit. Despite this, these state senators whom people elected are being ignorant and are actually the ones not being reasonable.
I want to remind the democratic senators that it is their job to participate in their government. After all, the people of Wisconsin entrusted them with the duty to fulfill what they want from their government. By running away from the problem instead of facing it head on, they are failing in their job and are not representing their people. They will not fix the problem if they do not participate in the government for their people.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Protecting Freedom or Our Interests?
After 30 years of control over Egypt, President Hosni Mubarak has decided to step down and give power of the country over to the military after millions had protested in the country's major cities demanding his oust. Mubarak has been outlined for his one-party rule and his oppression over many of the Egyptian citizens. However, Mubarak and his regime had become a major ally of the United States, as during this time Egypt supported Israel. In return, America has provided financial resources to them and has supported them vocally.
This week, as the protests were in full-swing, President Obama issued a statement, saying that he hopes Mubarak "will end up making the right decision", also known as urging him to step down. I believe President Obama should not have acted so quickly towards this turn of events across the Atlantic. While I realize that by promoting the actions of the protestors in Egypt, Obama is making a stand that certain oppression will not be tolerated and that freedom should always reign supreme wherever it can. But I caution Obama to take any part of this conflict, let alone the stance that he is taking. First off, President Obama must realize that by supporting the Egyptian protests, he is basically attempting to cut all ties with U.S.-Mubarak relations in one blow. By trying to do this, he is failing to recognize the support that we have given him in the past and that he is an essential ally to Iraeli relations in the Middle East. Secondly, I do not suggest the President to interject his views about the civil unrest in the nation because he follows an eerily-similar path that his predecessor took in Iraq. Obamaa should try to stay neutral on the topic and not make any remarks towards the country and their citizens, since the United States has a lot of merit between freedom and our own interests.
African-American Portrayals: Past and Present
This week in American Studies, we have begun to talk about the portrayal and stereotypes that surround African-Americans in today's society and in the past. After thinking about the perceptions that are connected to black people, we started to see some patterns that ring out in nearly every form of today's media.
Because we are a forward-thinking society, we would like to believe that racism has virtually been eliminated in the 21st-century. Despite these hopes, the negative stigmas that define African-Americans really flaw our views. Some portrayals of African-Americans include: violent, uneducated, and unintelligent. While there are millions of blacks in America that completely shatter these concepts (like President Obama), they always seem to be exceptions to the rule that the media presents. In primetime television dramas such as CSI and Law & Order, these negatives views about African-Americans are born. In both shows, blacks tend to be the criminals that are fighting against the law. But when they are on the "good" side, they always seem to be playing as a minor supporting character; a follower to the nth degree. In other forms of media, especially sports, African-Americans themselves use slang and profanity in their speech.
It is important that the media balances out their portrayals of African-Americans as much as possible. That way it gives the full spectrum, making it more and more realistic.
Because we are a forward-thinking society, we would like to believe that racism has virtually been eliminated in the 21st-century. Despite these hopes, the negative stigmas that define African-Americans really flaw our views. Some portrayals of African-Americans include: violent, uneducated, and unintelligent. While there are millions of blacks in America that completely shatter these concepts (like President Obama), they always seem to be exceptions to the rule that the media presents. In primetime television dramas such as CSI and Law & Order, these negatives views about African-Americans are born. In both shows, blacks tend to be the criminals that are fighting against the law. But when they are on the "good" side, they always seem to be playing as a minor supporting character; a follower to the nth degree. In other forms of media, especially sports, African-Americans themselves use slang and profanity in their speech.
It is important that the media balances out their portrayals of African-Americans as much as possible. That way it gives the full spectrum, making it more and more realistic.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
My Second Quarter Meta-Blog Post
At the beginning of the year, I thought that, to be honest, blogging was really a hassle and not an activity that I could use to benefit my writing skills. I have realized that, as the year has gone on, I have begun looking forward to my blog post every week, as it gives an insight into how American Studies class can relate to current event topics that are affecting our daily lives. Blogging has really helped me become much more aware of my surroundings and how that coincide with my classroom work.
This quarter, I have seen a few slight changes to my blogging style. First and foremost, the change that I believe has been most influential is my shift from a higher degree of focus on the current events rather than the classroom topics. Instead of starting with things said in class, like I have done earlier in the year, I have scoured other websites and external sources for fresh new information that I could relate to class. By having the current event be the foundation for my posts instead of vice versa, I have gained a heightened sense of American news and the stories that surround it. It's isn't too hard too find an obscure article that fits with our class disscussions, while it is much more difficult to take high-profile stories and relate it to something strikingly similar in the American Studies environment. Secondly, I have also begun to write blogs about material that I am more interested in, not just the ones that fit the bill. For example, sports and politics have become recurring themes in my blog because they are among my interests. I do believe that I need to work on my neutrality. Sometimes, my posts can have a negative bias and I really want to work on fixing that so all readers feel free to comment on.
I believe the post that exemplifies my second quarter is the one titled "Censorship in America". It really displays the trends and changes that I have been making. Here is the link: http://rennikss.blogspot.com/2011/01/censorship-in-america.html
This quarter, I have seen a few slight changes to my blogging style. First and foremost, the change that I believe has been most influential is my shift from a higher degree of focus on the current events rather than the classroom topics. Instead of starting with things said in class, like I have done earlier in the year, I have scoured other websites and external sources for fresh new information that I could relate to class. By having the current event be the foundation for my posts instead of vice versa, I have gained a heightened sense of American news and the stories that surround it. It's isn't too hard too find an obscure article that fits with our class disscussions, while it is much more difficult to take high-profile stories and relate it to something strikingly similar in the American Studies environment. Secondly, I have also begun to write blogs about material that I am more interested in, not just the ones that fit the bill. For example, sports and politics have become recurring themes in my blog because they are among my interests. I do believe that I need to work on my neutrality. Sometimes, my posts can have a negative bias and I really want to work on fixing that so all readers feel free to comment on.
I believe the post that exemplifies my second quarter is the one titled "Censorship in America". It really displays the trends and changes that I have been making. Here is the link: http://rennikss.blogspot.com/2011/01/censorship-in-america.html
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Media Biases
Last week, a tragedy occurred in Arizona that has shook the entire nation as a whole. As many of you know, U.S. House Representative Gabrielle Giffords was shot at point-blank range in an assassination attempt during a informational event in Tuscon. The suspect, Jared Lee Loughner, killed six others and injured twelve more besides Giffords in his gun rampage. This event, without a doubt, has stunned America as a whole in many different ways.
What has disturbed me is the media speculation that has surrounded this horrifying event. While these last few days should be ones of mourning and sorrow for the families that have been directly affected by it, the media has immediately jumped to conclusions. Already, the media claims that politics have a central focus in this event. Many sources, including high-ranking news outlets such as the New York Times, have put blame on conservatives for Loughner's actions. Some of their opinions include that Republicans are the sole reason for partisan rhetoric, that Loughner was a direct follower of Sarah Palin's website, which included an image of Giffords' district in the crosshairs, and the simple act of presenting Loughner to "resemble" right-wing talk show host Glenn Beck.
This is really awful on so many degrees. I believe that once these media outlets look into Loughner's background and the evidence against him, they will realize that conservatives are no more to blame than liberals. In fact, as it appears, Loughner had dropped out of both his high school and community college, a drug addict, and a firm believer in radical conspiracy theories. His favorite books, as stated on his MySpace page, include Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto. I firmly believe that as this evidence surfaces and becomes clearer and as common sense takes over liberal biases, the media will realize that Loughner is a mentally unstable and is insane. To make it more clear, Loughner has stated in the past that he neither sides with the Republicans or the Democrats; he is a registered independent.
I pray the media will realize their mistakes and apologize for their accusations. It is clear that while political partisanship might be involved, Republicans are in no way, shape, or form involved in this crises. As President Obama would say, “it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.” As Americans, we should realize that this is a healing process and not a string of hate. This horrible disaster is only one that“lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man’s mind" and not any other groups'.
What has disturbed me is the media speculation that has surrounded this horrifying event. While these last few days should be ones of mourning and sorrow for the families that have been directly affected by it, the media has immediately jumped to conclusions. Already, the media claims that politics have a central focus in this event. Many sources, including high-ranking news outlets such as the New York Times, have put blame on conservatives for Loughner's actions. Some of their opinions include that Republicans are the sole reason for partisan rhetoric, that Loughner was a direct follower of Sarah Palin's website, which included an image of Giffords' district in the crosshairs, and the simple act of presenting Loughner to "resemble" right-wing talk show host Glenn Beck.
This is really awful on so many degrees. I believe that once these media outlets look into Loughner's background and the evidence against him, they will realize that conservatives are no more to blame than liberals. In fact, as it appears, Loughner had dropped out of both his high school and community college, a drug addict, and a firm believer in radical conspiracy theories. His favorite books, as stated on his MySpace page, include Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto. I firmly believe that as this evidence surfaces and becomes clearer and as common sense takes over liberal biases, the media will realize that Loughner is a mentally unstable and is insane. To make it more clear, Loughner has stated in the past that he neither sides with the Republicans or the Democrats; he is a registered independent.
I pray the media will realize their mistakes and apologize for their accusations. It is clear that while political partisanship might be involved, Republicans are in no way, shape, or form involved in this crises. As President Obama would say, “it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.” As Americans, we should realize that this is a healing process and not a string of hate. This horrible disaster is only one that“lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man’s mind" and not any other groups'.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Censorship in America
This week in American Studies, we have discussed a current event topic regarding our current book, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. A publisher has decided to release an abridged version of the Mark Twain novel that removes the N-word from the book altogether and replacing it with "slave". This movement is another addition to the 21st-century phenomenon of censorship and "politically correct". I completely disagree with this decision wholeheartedly. I personally believe that if Twain had heard that a third-party publisher would essentially rewrite the meaning of his story, he would be outraged at this. It also goes to what we are as a nation. I think that we have to realize that the N-word is engraved in our nation's history and flaws and that by simply hiding it from our nation's youth, we are simply not accepting our failures in the past and not accepting it. Instead, we should teach our children about the background behind this word and ensure that we learn from it in a positive way.
This movement presents a striking parallel to the Native American mascot controversy in the United States. In 2005, due to strong pressures from the far left, the NCAA decided to create a self-evaluation into all collegiate athletic programs with possibly "offensive" imagery. One of the schools on this list was the University of Illinois due to their mascot, Chief Illiniwek, which the NCAA deemed "hostile and abusive". Chief Illiniwek, meaning "the indomitable human spirit" was a 70 year tradition that was created to celebrate the Native American heritage of the state of Illinois. Chief Illiniwek's His costume was designed by a Native American chief from the Lakota Tribe and his dances, performed at halftime of University of Illinois sporting events, was proclaimed by the U of I Board of Trustees "His ceremonial dance is done with grace and beauty. The Chief keeps the memory of the people of a great Native American tribe alive for thousands of Illinoisans who otherwise would know little or nothing of them." Despite all of these truths, clearly the NCAA was extremely ignorant and did not look into the history and background of what Chief Illiniwek. At Florida State University, however, the NCAA allowed the use of the nickname "Seminoles" because of tribal support. But because there were no more living members of the Illini tribe to support the Chief, the NCAA forced Illinois to retire the mascot and logo, therefore destroying a great and respectful symbol that payed homage to our state's rich history.
The censorship of Twain's novel and the University of Illinois' revered symbol are alike in so many ways, as they have fallen victims to this new era of unjustified politically correctness that is attempting to rewrite our nation's past. Instead of teaching our children about our past through these devices, many people and organizations are attempting to blind our citizens from the truth. Censorship, simply put, is not what America has ever stood for and never shall be.
This movement presents a striking parallel to the Native American mascot controversy in the United States. In 2005, due to strong pressures from the far left, the NCAA decided to create a self-evaluation into all collegiate athletic programs with possibly "offensive" imagery. One of the schools on this list was the University of Illinois due to their mascot, Chief Illiniwek, which the NCAA deemed "hostile and abusive". Chief Illiniwek, meaning "the indomitable human spirit" was a 70 year tradition that was created to celebrate the Native American heritage of the state of Illinois. Chief Illiniwek's His costume was designed by a Native American chief from the Lakota Tribe and his dances, performed at halftime of University of Illinois sporting events, was proclaimed by the U of I Board of Trustees "His ceremonial dance is done with grace and beauty. The Chief keeps the memory of the people of a great Native American tribe alive for thousands of Illinoisans who otherwise would know little or nothing of them." Despite all of these truths, clearly the NCAA was extremely ignorant and did not look into the history and background of what Chief Illiniwek. At Florida State University, however, the NCAA allowed the use of the nickname "Seminoles" because of tribal support. But because there were no more living members of the Illini tribe to support the Chief, the NCAA forced Illinois to retire the mascot and logo, therefore destroying a great and respectful symbol that payed homage to our state's rich history.
The censorship of Twain's novel and the University of Illinois' revered symbol are alike in so many ways, as they have fallen victims to this new era of unjustified politically correctness that is attempting to rewrite our nation's past. Instead of teaching our children about our past through these devices, many people and organizations are attempting to blind our citizens from the truth. Censorship, simply put, is not what America has ever stood for and never shall be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)