Shakira on Immigration

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/04/30/arizona.shakira.immigration/index.html

Shakira puts her two sense in on the fight against immigration in Arizona.  What impact will this have on the families who are currently abusing the system and living in our country illegally? The focus Shakira used was on Latinos; what will this bill do to these people? Arizona is trying to enforce police officers to study backgrounds and check to make sure people are living in the state legally, if there is suspect that they are not. If this law shall pass, it will go into effect in 90 days and would require those immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times. There is belief however that it will create government-sanctioned racial profiling by critics. Shakira claimed that she has spoken with Latino women who are scared about how this will affect their lives and families. She explained that these families will be living in fear of contacting the police/reporting a crime and will now have to protect themselves from the government. Shakira, Colombian born, will also be impacted as a result of this law because she is undocumented here. But, to what extent are we allowing aliens into our country. Our country is living in fear of these immigrants, and although they may not be doing harm; our nation needs to look out for it's citizens above all; the American taxpayers not the potential terrorists. 

We discussed in class how celebrities, such as Shakira impact the voters. By having celebrities endorse/reject politics, they may sway the opinions of their supporters. Shakira is using ethos to persuade the audience. She describes actual personal stories to the press on how Latina women are scared and how they will be negatively affected after presenting the logic of the bill that may potentially become a law. Ethos, or how the audience views her gives her authority to speak on behalf of the bill. 

Enthusiastic Voters

The article titled, "Voters 'Very Enthusiastic' Over Midterm Elections Favor GOP by 20 Points Finds Poll" from Fox News discusses how Americans were very enthusiastic about voting in the 2010 midterm elections overwhelmingly favoring the republican party. Of the 37 percent who said they are very eager to cast their votes in the November elections 57 percent indicated they will vote for a Republican candidate. While 37 percent said they will back a democrat. The article states that those who where going to vote fr a Democrat were only somewhat enthusiastic while others who were going to vote for a republican are very enthusiastic.
This article brings up a lot of issues, first it is stating that republicans are more excited and enthusiastic to vote in the november election compared to democrates. Could that be because republicans cant wait to get a chance to take back the power? Another issue this article brings up is attentive versus inattentive publics. This article is obviously discussing how the attentive public is enthusiastic about voting, but is the article geared towards the attentive public. I think the article is geared towards the inattentive public in that they are trying to get them more involved by stating how enthusiastic the rebublicans are to vote. This makes the inattentive public wonder why?

Obama asks for help...

This article was found at wsbtv.com and is about Obama asking his 2008 coalition to help him and his fellow democrats now in 2010. It states that president Obama has been pleading with his supporters to continue to aide him in re-energizing and broadening their coalition. In this plea, he stated that his “backers” were those that needed to be reengaged in this effort. These backers who first helped Obama win the election in 2008 include first-time voters, young people, African Americans, Hispanics, and independents. It goes on to state that many of the senior democratic officials do not expect this coalition of backers to show up in the booths if Obama himself is not on the ballot. They believe this because despite Obama campaigning in three other states for democrats, republicans have won all three races. This reminded me of what we recently talked about in class regarding coalitions. We all know that a coalition is a group of people with one goal. This particular coalition especially was diverse, which many are, and they clearly have taken the democratic side. People in a coalition may feel differently about many various topics, but in the end, they still have one goal. These democrats that are pulling together more than likely have very different views, but they all are still democrats.

Midterms

The midterm elections are approaching fast. There is no doubt that the democrats need to show the American people why we should keep our trust in them. For the conservatives on Capital Hill this is a perfect time to find out where they stand. Last week they held a meeting to discuss what issues to push on the American people. Over 10,000 attended the meeting and rep. agreed that the meeting was a success. Not only have they been pushing the issues but have been brain storming on their plan to take back the white house in 2012. Because of the elections and debate held in class this past week I thought that this article related to our class.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/20/conservatives.meeting.wrap/index.html

Ballot for Spring 2010 IPC 4020 Election

Check the line for the candidate for whom you would like to vote.

_____ Barr, Danielle

_____ Cunningham, Adam

_____ Lewis, Johnnie

_____ Masterson, Michael

The Obama Drama

This week's article comes from Yahoo! News and it concerns a man that could make news coverage for just swatting a fly..which has actually happened. That man is President Obama. As our book stated, one of the president's greatest powers is being able to garner media attention and President Obama can do just that without even trying. The article was about Obama having to deal with hecklers at a recent democratic fundraiser in Los Angeles. The fundraiser was held for Senator Boxer in her seeking re-election, but the article didn't focus on that. It was all about the hecklers attacking Obama. They shouted things such as "repeal don't ask don't tell," which was a key point of Obama's 2008 election. They also broke out into "yes we can" chants which was Obama's campaign motto back in 2008. Obama dealt with the hecklers by telling them that repealing don't ask don't tell is still on his agenda. He also stated to the hecklers, who were also democrats, that their shouting at the wrong people, they should be shouting at the people who oppose repealing the act. He then refocused his speech on Boxer's re-election. As far as the media is concerned, this article was clearly all about drama, which is one way to determine what is newsworthy, and it was also aimed at the inattentive public. This was one way of getting people who aren't very concerned with politics to tune in and see what took place at Boxer's fundraiser. What better to gain the attention of the inattentive public than a little "Obama Drama"?

After watching the debate on wednesday in class, I decided to look at another speech and see what the speaker used to appeal to his audience. In class, many of the potential canididates used all three different methods being; ethos, pathos, and logos. In the article, "Obama calls for passage of financial reform", it explains Obama defending the country's bailout of the auto industry last year. Throughout this speech I believe he mainly uses logos as a way to appeal to the audience. Here is one example used throughout the article and his speech that portrays logos, "On Friday…the Treasury Department informed Congress that this financial rescue – which was absolutely necessary to prevent an even worse economic disaster – will end up costing taxpayers a fraction of what was originally feared.” Obama here is using logic to explain that if he had not rescued the auto industry, there would have been worse results. Throughout the speech he also uses pathos by appealing to the audience emotionally. Obama states, “I once again called for reforms to hold Wall Street accountable and to protect consumers.” By explaining that he wants to protect customers, this will help appeal to the audience. Overall, Obama uses both methods, to make his point and explain his past actions.

The article I chose this week came from foxnews.com and is titled, Democrat Lincoln Finds Voice, Holds Strong in Face of Primary Challenge. It focuses on the Democratic Party nomination in Arkansas' Senate race. Blanche Lincoln is one of the front runners and has been under much attack by her running mates. I thought that this article was relevant to what was going on in class after the debate we had on Wednesday. So much of what was said ended up being attacks on the other candidates and not talk about the issues. But in the same way many of the candidates in our debate came out even stronger, Blanch Lincoln has done the same. Soon, she too will be going head to head with her opponenets in a televised debate. Hopefully, all of the candidates keep it pretty civil, which will show that they actually take what they are running for seriously.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/23/democrat-lincoln-finds-voice-holds-tough-face-primary-challenge/

Gay and Lesbian Rights Movements

After reading the chapter this past week on Gay and Lesbian Rights Movements, it made me think about how unfair it is for these young men and women who still don’t get treated equally. The article that I came across today was from CNN.com named “Aging issues can be tougher on gays” by author Tom Watkins. In this article Watkins discusses that when Kelly Glossip’s partner Dennis Engelhard was killed in a road accident due to snow in Missouri, and that after his partner died the state wouldn’t give him money. The state would have given money to a wife but not to a gay couple. This put big problem on Dennis Engelhard who was supporting his 17-year-old son. Since Dennis and Tom were domestic partners the state wouldn’t recognize them, which is truly sad and unfair to this couple. In the chapter in class it mentioned Bill Moyer’s movement action plans, the MAP. The MAP is a framework in understanding the dynamics of social movements. So the steps that social movement goes through. One that I will put a focus on for this article is the majority public opinion.

I feel this related to the CNN article because so many people have this bad wrap on gay and lesbians, when they don’t have any idea that they’re all like regular people. The values that many of these gay couples exhibit in their daily lives are impossible to tell apart from those of their straight neighbors. Just like partners Kelly and Dennis were, they both valued and participated in family life, and were committed to making their neighborhoods and communities better. When Dennis’s partner Kelly passed, he was just as upset as a regular husband and wife coupled. Dennis should be able to participate in the state giving him money and shouldn’t be left behind due to his sexual being. I thought this weeks chapter on rights movements, brought up interesting points, and I thought the article from CNN was very good to relate to the majority public opinion.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/wayoflife/03/17/gays.aging.problems/index.html

CNN Poll: Obama tied in Hypothetical 2012 Matchup

This article was from CNN.com, and it was based on how many people will re-elect President Obama and how many people will not. It states in the article that the public is split right down the middle on whether President Barack Obama should be re-elected and a majority of American predict he will be a one-term president according the a new national poll. Based on a CNN/ opinion research corporation survey released Thursday indicates that if the 2012 presidential election were held today only 47 percent of registered voters would back Obama, with an equal amount supporting an unnamed republican challenger. Fifty four percent people questioned say Obama will lose if he was runs for re-election in 2012. With 44 percent saying that the president would win a second term. This article was very interesting to me, because even in the beginning President Obama has been very honest as far as what he planned to do for the economy. Now that Obama has been elected as the president and he is actually doing what he said he would do people are still not satisfied with the changes that had been made. This article mentioned Bill Clinton and how he was re-elected even when he was running against a no name republic. But I must say that although I was very young when President Clinton was president he was an good president to me. However later on President Clinton was involved in a sex scandal, in which he denied at firs but ended up at the end admitting to it. Just like we discussed in class about Apologia, and how when president Clinton was faced with those charges he used differentiation and also denial at first. People still today consider president Clinton as being one of the best presidents ever. With that being said President Obama has been in office for almost two years and he has been nothing but honest and straight forward with us on how he plains to work on the economy. I just don't understand what the problem is, because in my opinion he had been an awesome president so far. I also feel that him and his wife Michelle Obama will go into history a being viewed as one of the best couples yet in the White House. Their romance to me is just like we discussed in class, which is a superior to us as an environment.

The Attack Strikes Again

The article titled, "Specter Attacks Primary Opponent's Military Congressional Records" from Fox News discusses how Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter attacked his Democratic primary opponent Joe Sestak for his record in the military and in congress. In the first attack ad, Specter, who is seeking his sixth term in the Senate said Sestak was "relieved of duty for creating a poor command climate" and he has one of the worst attendance records in the House. Sestak's campaign responded that "Democrats don't swift boat. We are better than that" and also has his superior officer in his defense. Specter's campaign also said Sestak was tying to "rewrite history" Even through Specter is comfortably leading in the polls he is focused on winning.

This article demonstrates how attack ads can extremely impact campaigns. Attack ads show the truth amout each candidates and brings out their flaws and truths. In this example this attack ad brought up some issues about the candidates that some people may not have known. Attack ads are important and can help lead the candidate in a certain direction in the campaign. Im m opinion attack ads are what i look forward to because i know there will be some issues and truths out for both of the candidates.

Obama Moves Focus to Economy

President Obama is currently in the process of his second largest reform in his presidency. This reform is focused on those of the financial industry, which has been down for quite some time now. The president will speak in New York later today, in hopes to address many of the problems that our financial industry is facing, and in the end will avoid a similar meltdown on Wall Street that occurred in 2008. This meltdown led to the current recession that we are in today. There have been rumors that the white house plans to compromise a 50 billion dollar liquidation fund; however there have been many that have opposed this idea. Obama is taking a more aggressive hands on approach has speed up the process of putting this reform in act. This is good news for any Americans, because The White House is working more efficiently with each other as opposed to the long months that it took to pass the Health Care reform. Overall this article made me happy to see that our President is doing everything he can in order to make our economy better.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/22/analysis.obama.wallstreet/index.html

Attack Attack!

Ahh the attack ad, or should I just say attack? We all saw tonight at the debate how intense and touchy such attacks can be. I wonder how much of an influence attacking an opposing candidate really has on the outcome of an election. I also wonder if the form of an attack has an influence as well, such as ads, speeches, articles, etc. This particular article from the Cleveland Plain Dealer is clearly involves an attack from the Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner on to Lt. Gov Lee Fisher. It goes on to explain how Fisher apparently accepted thousands of dollars in contributions to his U.S. Senate campaign. The money was tied to banks and financial institutions, which contradicts his pledge to clean up Wall Street if he is elected to Congress. Brunner attacks by saying that accepting these contributions compromises Fisher's ability to reform the financial industry and "guts trust in our government officials." Yes, these are just comments made or heard and used by a reporter, but how much influence do they really have? There has to be a point where the words and actions that are taken to attack another candidates go from just being a way to retaliate to actually doing some damage.

Edwards Denies Affair

An article entitled “John Edwards exposed as cheating lowlife, serial liar in book ‘The Politician’ by Andrew Young” was released by the National Enquirer. We all have heard of John Edwards, but few of us have probably heard about this enormous scandal that is now published for all to see. The article explains how Senator John Edwards, for many years, had been having an affair with a woman named Rielle Hunter. This woman ended up getting pregnant by Edwards, which is where the affair took a turn for the worse. A previous aide of Edwards named Andrew Young is where this information is coming from. Young said that Edwards refused to divorce his wife because not only did he still love her, but the voters still did, too. Many instances are listed stating that Hunter agrees and admits to having sex in the Edwards’ bed. The details that Hunter explains to Young are almost sickening. The talk of leaving his family to make a new one with her is not a good thing for voters to hear from their candidate. Eventually, Hunter got pregnant by Edwards. He asked her to get an abortion, hide her pregnancy, and do everything possible for this not to get leaked. Edwards asked Young to act as if he fathered the child, Young reluctantly agreed, and they moved to California where Hunter had a little girl (all paid for by Edwards). This horrific story reminds me of our discussion about former president Bill Clinton. Had Edwards admitted to the public that he was indeed having an affair in the first place, maybe they would have been more understanding. He began with denial, saying not only did he not have an affair, but he was the not child’s father. Later, Edwards comes right out and admits, “They caught me. It’s all over.” Had he been honest in the first place, Edwards may have had a chance to regain his good name and keeps his supporters. Also, if the affair would have come out early in the relationship, he could have avoided having a child by Hunter altogether. Never once did he apologize, according to Young, and therefore, an apologia was not given. He never tried to justify his actions, or explain that yes he made a mistake, but he’s done great things in the past. Edwards went straight from denial, to admitting his affair. He went straight from a respected candidate, to one hated individual.

Rising Distrust of Government in America...

The article "Rising Distrust of Government in America" is about how most Americans distrust the government and the reasons are because of the current economic and political conditions. A poll taken stated that about one in four Americans trust the federal government to do what's right. According to the Pew report based on the polling conducted "the dissastisfaction is due to what is called a perfect storm of conditions associated with distrust of government- a dismal economy, an unhappy public, bitter partisan, backlash, and epic discontent with Congress and elected officials." I think the distrust of government in America about the current economic and political conditions is because of the lack of issue advertising and sticking to it. I do not believe Obama discusses his policy positions and actually makes an effort to take action. He proposes many positions but America does not feel he, along with government in general follow through with these references of what "will be done." I think this article is also an example of a rhetorical audience. America was capable of being influenced by governments discourse of proposed actions, saw the lack of change, and are not trying to be mediators of change. By expressing our opinions of our lack of trust, government will hopefully try and change and follow through with their proposals, or atleast show effort in making America a better place economically and politically. Government is losing their ability to persuade America because we are slowly losing faith in their ability to better our country.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/04/19/poll-cites-rising-distrust-of-government-in-america/?fbid=cKyDYUakeBe ARticle..

Ask the Card-Carrying Socialist: Is Obama one of Them?

I found this article on CNN.com, and it was based on president Obama and if he was a socialist or not. The article states that socialized health-care is on its way. The"socialist agenda" is taking over America, and best of all Barack Obama is viewed as being a committed socialist ideologue is in the oval office. What exactly does that mean? Social security, medicare, and unemployment benefits are all viewed as a reflection of different socialist values. Socialism is defined as being workers and consumers who are affected by economic institutions by owning or trying to control them. What I couldn't understand about the article is that if the article is stating socialism is viewed as being a good or bad thing? Or is the article stating that since Obama is viewed as being a socialist, based on him passing the bill for health care? Which may indicate to some people that he is trying to control people by providing them with a certain kind of health care? It just seemed very interesting to me, because no matter how much Obama try to improve the economy it will always be viewed as being negative. I just don't understand how ex-president George W. Bush was re-elected as being president a second time, when all he did is made things worst for the economy. I am really interested in seeing the upcoming election, and the result of it.

Bullying in Schools

This week's blog comes on a much more somber note than my past entries. The article comes from Time Magazine and it deals with bullying in the educational environment and some of the consequences of bullying. It starts off with a story about an Irish-American girl named Phoebe Prince. Phoebe was a freshman in high school when she decided to take her life due to constantly being harassed and bullied at school. Since Phoebe was new to the school and began dating a popular football player, envious girls began to harass her. This harassment apparently went on for months and Phoebe's mom tried to get the school to do something about it but to no avail. After one horrible day where Phoebe was harassed in the school library, in the halls, and on her way home from school, she went home and hung herself with a scarf given to her by her sister on Christmas. The girl's flung insults at her calling her an Irish slut and Irish whore. The girls even went as far as making fun of Phoebe's suicide on Facebook. You have to truly be an evil person to make fun of someone's death; this is nothing to play about. Seven girls and two boys were charged in incidents leading up to Phoebe's death rightfully so. The manner in which this article is written is quite clear. The author of this article is creating an audience with Phoebe's story, an audience that is clearly against bullying. That makes this article a constitutive rhetoric. This allows for the story to be more touching and persuasive after you see what the effects of bullying has on certain people. After all, not all people who get bullied commit suicide but there are many cases out there of people who have done so or either goes on to take someone else's life. Bullying has very serious side effects whether the bully knows it or not.

Former Pres. Clinton Reflects on the Past

The article I chose this week is titled, "Clinton Draws Parallels Between 'Upheaval' of 1995, Today". It was written by John Helton on April 16, 2010 on www.CNN.com. Former President Clinton, in a recent interview, commented about the current mood of the country. He compared it to the mood of the country when he was in office right after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. He also talks about how technology has evolved so much in the past fifteen years, making it much easier for people who are trying to stir up anti-political sentiments communicate with others who feel the same way. He said that Timothy McVeigh was very disconnected in 1995. People now, can do anything on the internet, making it much easier to learn how to do things like make a bomb. He also touched on the Tea Party and what they have been doing lately. Clinton explained that he supports people who criticize the government because it is their right as an American to do so, as long as they do not get violent. I chose this article because we have been talking about Former President Clinton's time in office the past few weeks. But the chapter in our text did not talk about how he handled the Oklahoma City bombing, it simply focused on the Lewinsky scandal. It is sad that Clinton did a lot of good in office but he is mostly known for being impeached for having an affair and lying to the American people.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/16/clinton.okc/index.html

Obama criticizes mine owner, orders safety review

In the article "Obama cricizes mine order, orders safety review", the president discusses the poor safety administer by the mining industry, specifically Mass Energy Company. On April 5th a terrible accident occured in West Virgina, killing 29 people. Obama criticized the owner due to the fact that safety regulations were not inforced. This incident was the worst mining accident in forty years. When the mining company came back to defend themselves they used the process of denial. As discussed in class there are five methods used. The response to these accusations was denial. The company stated "We fear that the president has been misinformed about our record and the mining industry in general." They proceeded to disagree with violations made agaist the company and explain they are looking for the truth on what caused the incident. They explained they are willing to work with the government in order to reach the truth for the cause. However, the company is denying any fault for the cause of this incident. Obama later explains "we know what can cause mine explosions and we know how to prevent them. So I refuse to accept any number of miner deaths as simply a cost of doing business." Given the circumstances I agree with Obama. For such a serious incident to occur there must have been safety violations violated. I believe the mining company used denial in hopes to aviod taking responsibility for th 29 deaths. A better statement could have been used, explaining how they will change their company and the methods used to prevent any other additional accidents.

Cyberspace

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/16/military.cyberspace/index.html

Obama is currently attempting to eliminate cyberspace within the military. It is believed that cyberspace is connected to attacks on computer networks. However, they're concerned this new position could "violate laws with prevent the military from operating in domestic issues". The National Security Agency plays a role in protecting the nations computer networks and oversees domestic electronic communications which is another concern of the Senate's; but they're attempting to "safeguard the integrity of our military system. Lt. General Alexander is hoping that if this passes, he'll be in charge. They're hoping to build technology to better help defend networks. Despite the legal and policy issues, this could be in effect. In relation to stasis the definition would be the eliminating cyberspace within the military. The quantity or to what degree is this important would be if this comes into effect, how would people within and outside the military feel about this? The audience would be both the attentive and inattentive audience. The quality or how we interpret this message is important regarding the impact this would have on those in the military. It puts a lot of limits on their lives and abilities to communicate. The point where people disagree would be judged based upon the outcome of the vote. 

Radical Presidents

An article entitled “5 presidents more ‘radical’ than Obama” found on CNN.com explained the reasoning behind Newt Gingrich’s assumption that Obama has been one of America’s most radical presidents. The article goes on to state that indeed 5 other presidents have been more “radical” than Obama. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was said to be radical due overturning the two-term precedent set by George Washington and winning four terms when most other countries worldwide focused on dictators. John Adams is considered radical for signing the Alien and Sedition acts during the threat of war, outlawing anti-government dissent. Andrew Jackson is considered radical due to removing Native American policies, bringing about the infamous “Trail of Tears” that led to thousands of deaths. Abraham Lincoln was called radical for pledging to only preserve the union and wanting to stop the spread of slavery. Lastly, G.W. Bush has been considered radical because of the extreme choices regarding Iraq and reluctance to pay for his wars directly, contributing to our economic downfall. The article continues on to talk about how none of these “radical” presidents were truly radical in a global sense, just making good or bad decisions regarding American history. People are more worried about who Obama is as a person than as a president. Newt Gingrich argues that we are more worried about using fear and hate to cause a seen and make history, whereas we need to worry about doing better for ourselves and our country as a whole. This reminded me of how we talk about people being more worried about unimportant things when it comes to presidency. Citizens are more concerned with Obama being able to speak well, and whether or not he has an official birth certificate than him being able to lead our country. Although he may have great ideas and hopes for the USA, we are blinded by his color and stereotypes we place on him. Past presidents are referred to as radical after doing something drastically wonderful or horrible, but why? Why is Bush not remembered for his 9/11 speech or actions after 9/11? The inattentive audience needs to worry less about image, eloquent style, plebiscitary, language or speaking abilities (god/devil terms), and media opinions and learn to make their own assumptions and opinions. 

Obama is a romantic hero

Communication and narratives go hand in hand. When the media reports stories they do so in the form of narratives. We talked in class about the different categories stories can be as well as the different roles the characters can play, specifically the hero or protagonist. The main four types being comedy, romance, tragedy, and irony. In an article from USA Today titled “Obama to Take a Grass-Roots Approach to Conservation,” the media portrays Obama, the protagonist, as a romantic hero. They do this by explaining the things that Obama is doing for the conservation movement in a positive light. Such as, “Instead of just designating vast tracts of land to be protected from development, pollution and overpopulation, Obama wants the government to embrace a grass-roots approach to conservation that has quietly taken hold in recent years in U.S. cities and towns and across international borders.” This shows that he is going above and beyond the bare minimum he could be doing and taking it one step further. He is proving is heroism by being superior to the environment and us. This article also describes the members of the community as comedic heroes. They do this by talking about how they come together and untie to protect their communities. They do a good job at addressing the different groups of people involved. Everyone deserves to be a hero at some point in their life right?

Tea Party Heros

So this week we talked about the four master narratives, comedy, romance, tragedy and irony. I wanted to look for something that could match a person in politics to one of these categories. No need to look any further than the Tea partiers. On Thursday they released the "Heroes and Targets" list. this is the list of the people either they hate or don't. Keeping it boring and simple like most politics. I thought this fit perfectly into our class discussion because one could see the tea party fanatics as putting politicians in to a few narratives. In some ways one might see them as comedy, because they're on "of us" (according to the partiers of course). But then some hold them at such a high standard they could be see as all mighty, or romance. For the group of despised politicians they are looked at as a irony. They are inferior to the people in the tea party. They don't agree with us well lets put them on our target list. A little extreme but hey ti wouldn't be American politics with out some outlandish comment or movement.

Nebraska v. U.S. Supreme Court?

Newsweek’s article shown here discusses the state of Nebraska’s newly passed law that forbids abortions after 20 weeks from conception. This law, called the “Fetal Pain law,” argues the possibility that after 20 weeks the fetus can feel pain. This directly challenges the landmark case of Roe v. Wade where the Supreme Court recognized fetal viability (the point at which the fetus can live outside the womb) as the time that states can outlaw abortion.

As we discussed in class, a point of stasis is the point on which the overall argument hinges. In this case, the point of stasis is clearly how one defines a fetus as a human. Some groups believe that it becomes a human at conception, others believe that it cannot be defined as a human until it is actually born, and there are many groups in the middle of this continuum. This whole argument over abortion hinges on how human life is defined and at what point does an abortion become murder.

The Supreme Court has defined the fetus as a human when it can live outside the womb. Do you think that this Nebraska law will be brought to, and possibly surpass, the Supreme Court’s landmark case of Roe v. Wade?

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford Admits to Affair

The article titled "South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford" discussed South Carolina's governor Mark Sanford admitted to an affair and resigned his position as chair of the Republican Governor's Association. Stanford stated at a conference at the state capital in Columbia South Carolina, "I have been unfaithful to my wife. I developed a relationship with what started out as a dear, dear friend from Argentina" Sanford was emotional an people said he was rambling. Sanford also stated, "I'm a bottom line kind of guy I'm just gonna lay it out. It's gonna hurt and I'm going to let the chips fall where they may" "I've let down a lot of people, and that's the bottom line." The article the went on with apologies to his staff and everyone who believed in him.

I think this speech involved a fitting response. A fitting response is a response that fits the situation. I think this speech is a successful fitting response due to the fact that he acknowledged the affair and apologized for his behavior. I also think this involves eloquence which involves the delivery of the speech that can enhance ones ethos. The speech involved pitch, pace, volume, gestures and eye contact which lead the audience to see what kind of person the speaker is and how he or she feels about the situation. Sanford was very emotional during his speech and I saw that he knew what mistakes he has made, which lead me to see his character.

What is Eloquence?

After Monday nights discussion in class, and watching Bill Clintons speech, when he lied about the whole Lewinsky scandal it really made me think about eloquence. Eloquence is an excellent delivery of a speech and how it can enhance one’s ethos. It is truly significant, especially for a president because it suggests a lot. It suggests what type of person you are, by pace, pitch, and eye contact and volume. Something that Bill Clinton honestly didn’t have any of when he gave his speech that night. Eloquence also can be used by ones gestures and has a great deal of efforts to persuade. Watching Bill Clinton speak, it made me think what exactly his style even is. It clearly wasn’t a high style context; it was more of a low with just everyday language. I truly felt like he was all over the place.

President Bill Clinton was all over the place, and still to this day it’s hard to actually know what happened. When reading articles on this scandal I found one from CBS News titled “Monica Lewinsky Says Bill Clinton Lied Under Oath.” In this article author Stephanie Condon discusses how Monica Lewinsky say’s Clinton made up many lies saying “There was no leeway on the veracity of his statements because they asked him detailed and specific questions to which he answered untruthfully," Lewinsky reported. This goes back to the whole idea of the four stages of Apologa, denial, bolstering, differentiation, and transcendence. Since Clinton lied the first time during his speech, it was hard to believe him the second time around. I believe former president Bill Clinton really doesn’t have any eloquence. He definitely expressed many different emotions but he didn’t do it in a convincing way. He only tried to make himself better in the beginning, which didn’t help anything.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-5992393-503544.html

yay for the gay court...!

President Barack Obama is going to have a unique pleasure of being able to appoint two Supreme Court Justices to the court. Justice Sotomeyer has been serving since her appointment to the high court last summer. And now Justice John Paul Stevens has announced his retirement plans, giving the president his second opportunity. Naturally, there has been some speculation of who would be the most appropriate nominee for the court.

An article on the Nation’s website compares this time in our sociological history to that of the civil rights struggle of the 1960s. And subsequently, the article replaces the struggles of black Americans with that of gay Americans today. Noting how President Johnson appointed Thurgood Marshall to alleviate some of the strains of the civil rights struggle. Some argue, and the article does so as well, that President Johnson felt badly about how the executive branch had done little for the struggles of black Americans. He made the appointment to the court knowing that legislation can be changed, but the Supreme Court (for the most part) is final.

This can be applied to current day with gay Americans in that the Obama administration is indeed failing to follow through with its goal of eliminating “Don’t ask, Don’t Tell.” While, there are strides that are being made, it is clear that more can be done. The article, and these conversations, very clearly is an attempt to set the agenda by the news media. In this case, it’s not necessarily a negative attempt. The administration has to be sure to follow through with its plans.

Paul M. Smith of Washington D.C. would be the perfect candidate for the high court.

Obama Calls For Joint Action

This article is about nuclear terrorism and how it has emerged as one of the greatest threats to global security. President Obama called on world leaders "not simply to talk, but to act" to secure or destroy any nuclear materials. Obama addressed this issue at the nuclear security conference and told his fellow leaders that it was time "not simply to make pledges, but to make real progress for the security of our people." Obama continued with "It requires a new mindset that we summon the will, as nations, as partners, to do what this moment in history demands." This message Obama is trying to convey is geared towards any public whether its attentive or unattentive. He is trying to get the message across to a mass audience and is applying it to all individuals. I view this announcement as audience analysis. Obama is trying to reach different audiences (world leaders) and attempting to persuade and inform this audience about what needs to be done and how it needs to be done. He is using his instincts, beliefs, and politics to help create a powerful persuasive bond between him and other world leaders. Obama wants his fellow world leaders to embrace a greater role in relation to this current issue. He is also using his power to influence people that this is the right thing to do and the right steps that need to be taken.

Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/world/14summit.html?hp

Palin Drills Down Policy in High-Profile Speech

I found this article on CNN.com, and it focused on a speech that Palin gave last Friday. It states in the article that Sarah Palin delivered a speech that focused as much on policy ideas as it did on political combat. The article compared this speech to her 2008 presidential campaign, in which her speeches were all about partisan zingers and Obama bashing. Palin speech was at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, which she called president Obama decision to expand offshore drilling "smoke and mirrors", cover for a slate of more liberal energy policies that he and Democrats in congress plan to enact. She also faulted the Obama administration for not opening more areas to oil and gas drilling, in particular her home state. Palin feels that it's time to stop ignoring the National Petroleum Reserve Alaska and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, even if a caribou has to take one for the team. Palin basically throughout the whole article continued to talk against the Obama administration claiming that he had made several mistakes since becoming president. With that being said it seems to me that Sarah Palin is very confident about the 2012 election, and it seems to me that she is already preparing her inaugural speech. She seems to be building an image for herself, setting up goals and focusing on the issues that she feel haven't been taken in to consideration yet by the Obama administration. I really can't wait to see if people is really taking her seriously in this up coming election, which is one of the concerns that many people have according to this article from CNN.com.

Tiger Stirring Up Quite A Roar

The article this week is from Yahoo Sports concerning Mr. Woods. Tiger has been in the news a lot lately since choosing to make his first return to Golf at this year's Masters, the biggest tournament within the PGA. People felt that it was sort of a insult to the other competitors that Woods is still considered to be the fan favorite at this year's tournament, but that is to be expected when dealing with Woods, arguably the best golfer ever. The new "news" concerning Tiger however is not about his performance at the masters, rather his lingo concerning his performance. The article notes that in Tiger's public apology back in February, he said that he would be more cautious about his actions on the course and that meant no more fist-pumping after big shots and no more profanity after missing those big shots, which seems to not be the case at this year's tournament. Tiger just can't seem to control his emotions on the course, and that should be expected of any great athlete who has a passion for the sport. Tiger is "reportedly" caught live on CBS microphones saying, "Tiger Woods, you suck" via (Yahoo Sports). This is pretty odd to me seeing as he is referring to himself in second person. I know Tiger's being through some hard times as of late and he's lost a lot of sponsorships, but I don't think he's lost his mind. At any rate, this article clearly shows that the media is making this news. By all standards of what makes things newsworthy, Tiger's story doesn't make the cut. This is not a major concern of the mainstream public. Although it does meet the characteristic of being timely, it is more sensationalized than anything. This is the news media acting as drama-seekers rather than just being "objective" which is never true of any news media. They are making this news, it is not a main concern of the public, it's more of gossip talk. Just another way to keep Tiger under close scrutiny. The media is waiting for him to mess up just a bit so that they can begin to attack again like a wild pack of wolves. My suggestion to Tiger would be to make sure he uses the crosswalk when walking the streets because they are waiting for any slip up to start another roar about the Tiger.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/10/us/politics/10stevens.html?ref=politics

The article that I read this week came from www.newyorktimes.com and is titled “Steven’s Retirement is Political Test for Obama”. It focuses on the retirement of eighty-nine year old, associate Supreme Court Judge John Paul Stevens. Not only is this a big deal because Stevens has served as a Judge for thirty-five years, but also because this means that President Barack Obama will get to nominate someone new to Supreme Court. Few presidents have had this opportunity. The article explains that this will be a big decision especially after the healthcare bill. The President says he has it narrowed down to ten candidates, three of whom he is really pulling for. They democrats fear that whoever he appoints, the Republicans will deny. Things could get ugly. I chose this article because we just read a chapter on the appointment of Supreme Court Judge Clarence Thomas in 1991. That appointment, however, was embedded in a scandal between him and Anita Hill. Hopefully President Obama’s choice will not involve any drama like Judge Thomas had. But I think today if something like that were to happen again, the woman would be taken much more serious that Anita Hill was nearly twenty years ago. Women have gained much more respect since then.

Glenn Beck Speaks Out

· USA Today: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/technologylive/post/2010/04/twitterstorm-of-haikus-hit-glenn-becks-twitter-account-/1

· Media Matters For America: http://mediamatters.org/research/201003120055

Is Glenn Beck to be hit by a “Twitterstorm”? As a result of comments he had made which associated religious groups regarding his concern with social justice has caused backlash to one group in particular. Beck has attacked social justice and it’s relation with churches. He was quoted describing social justice as “code language for Marxism,” warning that “when you see those words, run.” (Beck) The philanthropic group, Jewish Funds for Justice, has concerns with Beck’s association with Communism and Nazism to social justice. This group is campaigning to ‘flood Beck’s Twitter account” with religious ‘haiku’ as well as lines such as, “it’s so quiet; except of course for Glenn Beck, he’s never quiet.” The group’s is campaigning to swamp Beck with these messages via Twitter’s “reply” function. "While faith traditions may be different, the thread of social justice cuts across lines of faith. In a country increasingly torn apart by fundamentalism, undermining this thread that ties us together is dangerous." (Mic Moore of Jewish Funds for Justice)

This group is using Twitter as their medium tool to hopefully cause an impact on Beck, but because Twitter is their tool of choice, who are they really trying to catch the attention of? The inattentive public who pays little attention to politics, but is fully aware of Twitter are more susceptible to picking up on this story and rebel against Beck, although they might not be aware of each side. I’m going to discuss this event with Toulmin’s Model for grounds, warrant, and claim. The ground for the Jewish Funds group comes as a result of backlash on social justice and his association with religion. The warrant exists because there is evidence regarding Beck’s insight on the matter. The claim or the rebuttal comes via Twitter as those who don’t approve are asked to “reply” and acknowledge their disapproval. Although Beck may not have said what he did, is Twitter an appropriate tool to backlash on?

We’ve discussed Glenn Beck in class and his political views as well as how he an advocate of speaking what he feels. How influential is Beck and do his views really impact the public?

To Believe Obama or Not to Believe Obama

The article from Fox News titled "Newt Keeps the Doors open on 2012" discussed how former House Speaker Newt Gingrich had the crowd at its feet before he even spoke at the 2010 Southern Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans. Gingrich states, "This is the most radical president in American history, historians will some day write that the more Obama talked, the less people believed in him." Gingrich gives a shot at Obama before the ovation even ended saying that when Obama speaks from the heart you don't need a teleprompter. Gidrich goes on to as republicans to commit that a republican president and congress will repeal every radical bill passed by the Obama administration. Obviously in this speech Gingrich is speaking to republicans.

I think this relates to audience analysis in the sense that the rhetor needs to know what appeals, whether or not they will be logical, emotional, or ethical and what will work with what audience. Gingrich is using audience analysis in this situation because he is a republican and he is speaking to republicans. Therefore knowing what appeals to the audience, if the issues are logical for the audience, how the audience emotions come into play and if the issues are ethical or not. Gingrich is calling Obama radical and the crowd is cheering, this is showing the Gingrich has done his research on the audience and knows they believe the same view as he does.

Jobs Will Spark this Economy...

Unemployment rates still remain at an extreme low, which is draining many states jobless benefits funds. This in return is forcing states to borrow billions of dollars from the federal government. Hibah Yousuf’s article states that 33 states have depleted their funds and borrowed over38.7 billion dollars from the federal government to provide for each states citizen. California, Michigan, and New York have borrowed the most of any state. The federal and state governments collect for unemployment benefits by taxing all employers on a small portion of their employee wages. I believe that the main problem the government is now facing is that because unemployment rates have grown so much as of recent, that the government hasn’t increased the taxes at the same pace causing many states to be behind.
I believe that the main problem is how low our unemployment is. We need to create more jobs for our citizens and start working in the 21st century. In creating jobs the government will start to see a rise in the economy, and eventually will have more and more benefits for those without jobs. As stated in class, infrastructure is what allows the economy to grow. “If you build it, they will come.” This statement might come from field of dreams; however it does have a great importance. The 2010 census is going to allow the government to allocate funds to build in areas of the country that is very populated. My only hope is that these funds will spark more jobs for our citizens.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/08/news/economy/state_funds_jobless_benefits/index.htm

In Terms of Politics

In reference to politics the concept of surrogate is someone who will talk on terms of the campaign and get the candidates name out in the open. That got me thinking that the campaign surrogate tends to be the spouse. The spouse is the one who speaks great words about her husband running for presidency. This also got me thinking of how much the wives of the campaigns have to endure on the long campaign trail. Not only do the spouses give name recognition to their husbands, but they also deal with a lot of scandals and gossip in the political world. In recent years we have had to see many spouses endure their husbands cheating on them. Therefore the spouses have to decide whether or not they should stand by their man. It is very rare in politics where you see a wife as a surrogate for her husband’s campaign trail and the other way around, a husband as a surrogate for his wife’s campaign trail.
But this has happened, with former president Bill Clinton and his wife Hillary Clinton. In the article “In Politics, What is a Campaign Surrogate?” They discuss Bill Clinton’s campaign trail with wife Hillary saying “Bill Clinton is in a unique position for a spousal campaign surrogate, having actually served in the office his wife is running for.” Sometimes we underestimate if a couple will be able to figure out their problems, but the Clinton’s definitely did. I think it’s great that with all the speculations, and problems the Clinton’s had to deal with, they still stood by each other. A surrogate in terms of politics is quite a big deal, what do you think?


http://www.wisegeek.com/in-politics-what-is-a-campaign-surrogate.htm

Obama Continues Tradition

On Monday, President Obama continued on with the tradition of throwing the first pitch, making it 100 years straight. Our past Presidents have occasionally thrown elsewhere than Nationals Park, but the pitch has always taken place. This article found on CNN.com explains how Howard Taft began this tradition in 1910 in Washington on Opening Day. It continues on to talk about the different pitching styles which vary from president to president, just as the speaking styles and image styles vary. President Carter chose not to throw the opening pitch until he was out of office, claiming presidency was much too busy during his times. He, as well as the few other presidents who have chosen not to throw the first pitch, then choose his vice president or a member of the cabinet.

Just as the article states that a first pitch says a lot about a president, I feel the inaugural speech, and way a president portrays himself does as well. In class, we discussed what inaugural speeches will always contain. A few of these include explaining tradition, building an image, and usually talking about the “American dream” or at least goals and hopes for the future of the country. This is easily related to the president throwing the first pitch at a baseball game. He follows the tradition, creates a positive image, and just like us, enjoys baseball, the American past time. Obama, dressed in his pull-over jacket, has clearly stepped out of his extremely sophisticated ways, and is ready to show American’s that he is ordinary and loves baseball just as much as the next person. Field of Dreams represents the “American Dream” and tradition, just like the president throwing the first pitch. “If you build it, they will come” works with Obama’s pitch, too. If he builds this positive image, and shows the people he cares about and loves our traditions, his supporters, new and old, will come. Something that we have also talked about in class is how presidents are not required, but choose to say some form of “God bless you” at the end of their speeches. Once started, all presidents after have continued on with saying “God bless,” probably due to the positive response. If the people like something, presidents will do it. We like baseball, Christianity is one of our main religions, and tradition in general is highly valued in America. I believe we will continue to see our presidents throw the first pitch and say “may God bless you” for many years to come.

Does Old-Age Really Equal Wisdom?

The Associated Press’s article found here insists that being older is being wiser. This article indicates that older people are wise “in knowing how to deal with conflicts and accepting life's uncertainties and change.” This quality of having a better analysis of social problems could explain why Obama stopped dying his hair to hide his “salt and pepper.”

In class yesterday we talked about how grey hair was related to ideas of wisdom and that it can impact a political campaign. This article reinforces the reasoning behind why it is a good move (politically) for Obama to let his grey hair grow out a bit - because the American people will be more likely to see him as someone who knows “how to deal with conflicts” which is definitely something that our current President needs to do. Even though Obama’s campaign for the presidency has come to an end, he still needs to “look the part” of the president that we expect; and according to this study that is something that a candidate is able to accomplish simply with a little help from Revlon.

My original thought was: “But what does that say about us as voters when we are more likely to vote for a person based on the color of their hair?” I guess this article proved me wrong; older does mean wiser. Therefore, maybe it isn’t such a bad idea after all to favor a politician who is showing a little grey.

The "T" Word

The article I read this week was titled, "Words as Weapons-Dropping the Terrorism Bomb" from the New York Times. It talks about how since September 11th, 2001, Americans have really learned to just throw the "T" word around like it is no big deal; like it is not an extremely loaded word that once someone is accused of being a terrorist that they will probably be branded one for life. People use the word far too open, in many cases when it does not even apply. People also use it when stereotying others. We have gotten in to such a habit of labeling people that it seems like to many Americans, anyone who is Muslim, could ultimately have ties with a terrorist group. The article talked about Major Hasan who went on a shooting spree in Fort Hood, Texas. He was muslim and was labeled a terrorsit for what he did. He was Muslim. If he would have been christian, would he have been labeled a terrorsit? I doubt it. This srticle grabbed my attention because in class we have been talking a lot about 'God' and 'devil' terms. Terrorism is definitely a 'devil' word. It seems like as of lately, more and more people are using the word and pointing fingers at people. If the accusation is wrong, it could really ruin a person's reputationa and life. We must be careful when dropping the "T" bomb.

The Nude Badu

Back again for another spin on this weeks events. Many things happened in the media this week such as Ricky Martin "coming out of the closet" and actress Anna Paquin announcing that she is bisexual. Clearly this was a shock to a lot of people, well not so much concerning Ricky Martin's sexuality. But the article that I will focus on is one concerning Miss Erykah Badu at her best! lol Ms. Badu hadn't been in the media lately and what better way to gain media attention than going nude in the middle of a public place in broad daylight. Badu shot her new video in Dealey Plaza, Dallas, Tx. This is the same place where President JFK was assassinated in 1963. The song is entitled 'Window Seat'. In the video, Badu is walking down the street and undressing in front of locals. She removes her shirt revealing a tattoo that says evolving on her back. She then removes her pants and undergarments. This is evolution at its best; evolving from a fully clothed woman into a totally nude sex symbol or "symbols" if you at all catch my drift. Anyhow, Badu was recently charged with disorderly conduct by the Dallas Police Department for her "freeness". At the end of the video, after stripping totally naked, Badu falls to the ground at the hands of a gunshot. Now is it just a coincidence that she shot the video where JFK was assassinated and then she supposedly suffers the same fate in the video? I think not. Responding to criticism regarding this incident, Badu stated that she would never disrespect JFK and that his way of thinking is an inspiration to her. No wonder JFK was such a lady's man, even beyond the grave, he is inspiring women to get naked. Anyhow, I consider this whole situation to be a pseudoevent. All of this was staged to get Badu back or Badu's "Back" in mainstream media and she certainly achieved that. Nice move Badu!

Obama's Spar Over New Jobs

This article is about how President Obama and his GOP critics engaged in a war Friday over news that the economy had added 162,000 jobs in March. Obama claimed credit for a economic recovery while Republicans argued the administration has stifled stronger potential growth. Obama claims the country has successfully "turned the corner" and said "This has been a harrowing time for our country, but the worst of the storm is over." The comment that began the war was Obama stated "we cant forget the failed economic policies that got us into this mess." After this statement, Republican Chairman Michael Steele blasted the president. Michael Steele replied with, "It is unacceptable for President Obama to declare economic success when unemployment remains at 9.7 percent and a large portion of the job growth came from temporary boost in government employment." I think this war attracted a lot of media attention. I think this issue gained media attention because President Obama and Republican Michael Steele are both big political figures and it shows the power each of them have and how people believe both of their opinions about job availability in our country. They are both providing their own speech acts by expressing their opinons and conveying meaning. They are both persuading and providing reasons for how they view the job market and it is up to society to decide who to believe.

Disgruntled Democrats join the tea party

In the article Disgruntled Democrats join the Tea Party, it discusses the current effects of the health care in which Obama has recently passed. It deals with what was discussed in class as winner and losers and such a dividing between the two parties. The bill that recently passed has angered a lot of people making it a very dividing issues. Some democrats have even resorted to joining the tea party. A lot of individuals want less goverment and fear that this bill is becoming too much government in a private health care system. Even though I believe everyone has a right to their own opinion, however I do think people are overreacting to this current issue. Obama made his decision clear about wanting Universal Health care, and now people seem to be acting shocked? I think the health care system could be very beneficial to the citizens of the United States. Being a college student and approaching graduation, I could potentially be without health insurance very soon. With the recent state of the economy it could take longer than expected to find a job. The idea of this is very intimidating and makes me a firm believer that the country needs a universal health care system. I believe everyone has a right to their opinion and they all should be voiced however I think this article shows how people are not giving Obama or the bill a chance.

www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/02/democrats.tea.party/index.html

Nightclub Debt

This past week in the textbook we read about scandals. The case focused mostly on the Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky scandal. It discussed how the situation was handled and the ramifications of it. There was an article from USA Today online about another scandalous situation that the Republican National Committee is facing. Apparently the RNC is investigating how almost $2,000 of its campaign account was spent at an adult nightclub in Los Angeles. The article continues to explain that the charges were for food and the adult nightclub is a high-end nightclub, not a strip or sex club. The way this situation is reported by the media it makes the situation seem less serious and explains that the money is going to be reimbursed and there is nothing to worry about. The media can be seen here as the watchdog. It is keeping an eye out for the RNC by defusing the situation and reporting what they have to but keeping it not as severe as maybe it should be. This is different than how the media reported on the Clinton Lewinsky scandal. The text talks about how the media operated like an angry pack of wolves when covering the situation. I bet the RNC is happy the media is going easy on them.

Florida doctor's sign warns away Obama supporters

This article was focused on two main issues, the people who voted for Obama and on the new health care plan. I found this article on www.usatoday.com, and it talked about how a doctor posted a sign up outside his door about how all the people who voted for Obama should find another doctor to care for them. Although it is unethical and against the law to not serve an individual based on their race, religion, or gender, it doesn't necessarily says that in regards to political issues. I felt that this article was ridiculous how can you refuse not to serve someone based on them voting for Obama, because in that case it should of been a lot of people refusing serve people who vote for president Bush. What I don't understand is how can you be mad about change that will eventually end up helping the economy? I just thought this article was ridiculous and it tied in to a lot of class discussion that we discussed in class about being ethical or unethical. In my opinion I feel that it is unethical, because although he said that he would still be doctors to some of the Obama supporters if they still wanted him to be their doctor. But what I didn't like is that he basically said that he really didn't want to be Obama supporter doctors, because he feel that the health care plane is stupid. This article was very unethical, and I couldn't understand why a lot of people dislike the new health care plan.

Why Everyone Loves Joe Biden!

Newsweek’s article titled, “Say It Just So, Joe” is basically an article about bragging about Vice President Joe Biden.

While his selection as Obama’s running-mate was not as widely celebrated as Sarah Palin’s appointment as John McCain’s running-mate, the liberals still liked him. This article explains that liberals saw a few key things about Biden that they liked, including, “Biden's experience as a substantive asset in the White House, balancing out Obama's lack of experience on Capitol Hill and in international diplomacy.” Not only was he a candidate who could, “Resonate with the white working-class voters,” but now this article talks about Biden’s “thriving fan base.”

If this does not show the use of God and Devil terms, then I don’t know what does!

Just a few God terms that this article uses are: experience, substantive asset, resonate, working-class, best choice, and thriving. Using these God terms shows Biden in a very positive light and kind of makes us like him even if we didn’t beforehand.

Some Devil terms used in this article are: lack of experience, hawkish tendencies, and same old thing. These terms are used to characterize other people that this article talks about, including President Obama.

The use of these God and Devil terms are not meant to criticize Obama in any way; but by showing us how Biden can be seen as a friend to Republicans, we can see why he was a good choice as Obama’s running-mate: he could sway Republican voters. He was also the Democrat who could keep the Hillary Clinton supporters voting democrat on Election Day, whom some Republicans thought would rather vote for John McCain.