Mr. President

Yesterday, I wasn't sure what to think.  Barack Obama had won.  Four hours earlier I had cast my vote.  The months preceding I had followed the campaigns, watched the debates, and reviewed the candidates.  With in a day, America decided.  All in a moment, there he was: my future president.

I can't say that I am particularly pleased, or for that matter, I'm not extremely fearful.  While I disagree with the President elect on a number of issues, I believe this decision will ultimately unify the nation.  The surface level effects and the short-term benefits are at the moment very palatable.  America has come a long way.  We have elected an African-American as president.  For this I am hopeful and grateful.  Had McCain won, I fear our cities would have suffered bitter rioting.  Our country's civil wounds would have deepened.  At the present, citizens are rightfully rejoicing and the media's biting tongue can rest for a while.

The short-term effects are healing, but I fear the long-term effects to come.  Whether or not the war in the Middle East was merited, an immediate removal of military forces would be detrimental.  I do not want another episode of Vietnam.   Moreover,  Obama's intentions to relieve the economic lower class are good; but, his means of going about it could be hazardous.  Higher taxes on larger companies would force companies, such as, Walmart, to either cut employers or raise prices.  This intern effects the lower class who have come to rely on "everyday low prices."

Obama is a strong leader and a powerful speaker.  He did not get my vote, but I will give him my support.  I still have a voice, and the President Elect has promised to hear it.  

The Irony of Hypocrisy

This past Tuesday my ENG 114 class watched the documentary "The Shadow of Hate."  The film examines America's history of intolerance.  The narrator began with the Pilgrims voyage and exposed the terrible hate and violence directed towards minorities in America.

I saw incredible irony throughout the whole film.  This country, founded on the grounds of equality, liberty and justice for all, has an tumultuous history of denying desired rights.  Pilgrims seeking the God given right to be free from persecution begot a nation that has hated Native Americans, Quakers, Baptists, Irish Catholics, Jews, Africans, Chinese, Japanese, Women, etc. and etc.  Humanity is out to destroy itself.

What angers me the most is the fact that people justify themselves with our nation's sacred texts; namely, the Constitution and the Bible.  Why must people claiming the grace of God, people who proclaim their devotion to a just and loving God, misuse the Bible?  Fear plays into the hearts of men.  It blinds us.  It creates panic and tension.  I believe those people who have taken fear into their own hands, those who use violent and hateful tactics and take the Word out of context, have lost sight of God's promise.  Their actions say the distrust God's plan; so much so, that they rather go about changing culture by their own Neanderthal means.  They don't want to see truth.  I would contend that some of those people aren't true Christians at all; rather, they are using the Bible to promote their own brutal campaigns.

Questioning the gushy stuff

I was excited to hear we were watching a movie in class.  I love movies!  I was also intrigued by the subject of the film.  Iron Jawed Angels tells the courageous story of a brilliant group of suffragettes.  The film closely follows the personal journey of activist Alice Paul, played by Hillary Swank.  We did not get to finish the entire film during the period; however, the hour and fifteen minutes did give me some curious thoughts.

From the first scene I was immediately immersed in the story.  The short frames and moving music rapt my attention.  The script and actors worked well to build interesting characters (can a political activist manage to be an uninteresting person?)  Everything was going smoothly until the camera focused in on a new character played by Patrick Dempsy.  I won't go in to detail as to what I think of Dempsy as an actor.  Suffice to say, I don't care for the sappy, overly smooth ladies men.  When I saw him enter the frame, I laughed out loud.  Of course, I thought, what would a chick flick be with out a little romance thrown in?  The choice of Dempsy also amused me.  Dempsy's character is the gentle, sensitive, Mr. Mom type.  This, in and of itself, is not terrible.  Throw him into a group of "iron jawed" women, he could get gobbled up.  His character is in no way a threat to these young, ballsy women.  Had he been any more macho, he might have tipped the scale.

What made me smirk the most was the typical Hollywood romance device employed.  Alice Paul walks into his studio, sees a picture of Dempsy with another woman and child, gets angry, and proceeds to walkout.  Herein-lies the cheap trick, his wife is four years dead.  The hearts in the audience sigh a resounding "Aw!"  His four years of loneliness only make his pursuing more credible.  Plus the fact that he has a kid, which he later takes to a dinner meeting, contributes to his sensitivity.

If you, dear reader, can not tell, I despise mechanical pulls on my heartstrings.  I am in no way against love, romance, and being pursued.  I just can't stand the unnecessary insertion of Hallmark card material.  I am looking forward to finishing up the movie. Maybe, I'll surprise myself by finding purpose to this relationship.  Frankly, I think not.  The Alice Paul in real life didn't need the Dempsy character; so, its more that likely that the film could do away with the nonsense as well.

Response to Question:

Considering the Language and Evidence used in the arguments of Susan B. Anthony's speech, 

"Women's Right to Vote," and The Black Panthers' "Ten Point Plan," which is the most persuasive and why?

Based on the language and evidence provided in the civil rights arguments of Susan B. Anthony 

and the Black Panthers, I believe Susan B. Anthony proves to be more persuasive. Anthony keeps her

audience in mind. Anticipating her audience's reaction, she preemptively backfires with solid evidence.

She takes the offense, choosing her opponent's own "sacred" documents to support her claim. Her

evidences include; the Declaration of Independence, the Bible, Slave laws, the Constitution, and even, the

very law she with which she was convicted.

Similar to Anthony, the Black Panthers incorporate their argument with the Declaration of Independence.

They also include tones of Marxism and reference Sherman's Restitution Act. Unlike Anthony, however,

they believe their argument to be self-evident. The readers of this document can feel their fuming

temper and bitter rage. Frustrated with the indifferent response to Martin Luther King Jr.'s civil

disobedience, the Black Panthers choose to fight rather aggressively. Their tone is emotive and

confrontational. I believe that while their argument may have spurred a short term response, their

aggressive tactics ultimately maintained the civil dissension. Thus, I believe Anthony's argument to be

more effective.

My Thoughts Last Night

Last night I read Ursula Le Guin's short story "The Ones Who Walk Away form Omelas."  I found it fantastically thought provoking.  Her literary language kept my mind rapt.  Le Guin's award winning piece questions the possibility of a utopian society with out the existence of suffering.  The terrible paradox Le Guin presents spurred my own thoughts.

A Brief Summary

The narrator presents a fairy-tale utopia: a place of bliss and perfection called Omela.  If the descriptions of gold and cheerfulness aren't enough, the reader is asked to imagine "it as your own fancy bids."  As if to perceive the reader's disbelief in such a fantastical land, the narrator requests the consideration of one more thing.  The narrator proceeds in depicting the horrific suffering of a child.  Neglected, malnourished, and physically abused, the child's suffering enables the happy utopia for all Omela.  The happiness, health, wisdom, etc. of the society "depends wholly on this child's abominable misery."

The final paragraph provides the purpose of the story's title.  Some people reject Omela.  "They walk ahead into the darkness, and they do not come back.  This darkness can not be described by the narrator.  It is too "unimaginable," even non-existing.  The ones that leave, however, seem to internally know where they  are going.  The reader is not given a particular reason for their departure; only that "they go on."

My Thoughts Last Night

While reading this story I saw the two different interpretations: suffering or sacrifice.  The first being the intent of the author, and the second being related to my personal convictions.  The author clearly uses the child to symbolize suffering.  The "ones who walk away" see this suffering and, out of repulsion, leave the city.  The chose not to place the cost of their happiness on an innocent victim.  They retreat into the darkness where no solution exists.

I see this paradox parallel to my word-view.  In my story, I see the child representing sacrifice.  Like the child of Omelas, this child's suffering provides the grounds for his people to live.  My child is different.  He suffers out of compassion for his people.  He was not forcefully imprisoned, he sacrificially gave himself to his people's happiness.  His radical compassion didn't just end with suffering.  He rose out this death victoriously.  This child no longer suffers, but he has conquered through his sacrificial act. He did all this to provide his people with hope, joy, purpose, and paradise.  In my story, the "one's who walk away" see this sacrificial suffering but are repulsed and full of doubt.  They reject this story and walk away into darkness.

Those were my thoughts last night.

Frozen

After a long summer and two full semesters without an English class, the composition compartment of my brain woke up from hibernation. Groggy and out of shape, I spent an entire week attempting to form cohesive thoughts together in a desperate effort to create a thesis. During my sleep I had, of course, written descriptive letters and journals; however, none of these activities maintained my high school conditioning. My experience this past week reminded me of an event that took place this summer.

My brother and his friends frequently take part in creative mischief. This summer they decided to use their man power to capture an innocent house fly in the name of science. John and his friend managed to hunt and successfully trap the fly. They then placed the creature in a Tupperware container and stowed it in the freezer. They hypothesized that the cold temperatures would greatly reduce the fly's energy levels; thus, leaving the fly in an incapacitated state. The fly then would be tied to a fishing line and given time to recuperate. Once stable the fly would be named and trained as a pet.

This past week I felt akin to the house fly. My writing skills had been stowed, persevered and frozen in the back of my mind. While compartmentalized, my legs were tied to a string. When I awoke, I not only suffered from and overwhelming brain freeze, but I soon discovered limitations to my writing ability. Mournful and distressed I belted out a mediocre essay. The good news is I am not a house fly but a student. A student, who with a good dose of coffee and effort, will break out of invisible bonds and write freely and gracefully.