In the article “Boiling the Frog”, Paul Krugman uses the metaphor of a boiled frog to represent a serious problem America is facing. That problem is the difficulty of responding to disasters that creep up on you a bit at a time. The boiled frog refers to the proverbial frog that when placed in a pot of cold water that is gradually heated never realizes the danger it’s in until it is boiled alive. Krugman asks “Is America on its way to becoming a boiled frog?” Our nation is constantly facing disasters these days and the recent policy actions take a substantial amount of time to have their full effect. Using the example of the economy, Krugman explains how the Obama stimulus plan wasn’t as strong as it should have been, therefore, all the signs are pointing to a “jobless recovery”. According to economic forecasters, we need another round of stimulus to help pull the economy out of its deep hole. Now that the free fall is over, all sense of urgency has vanished.
Along with the economy, another major problem is climate change. The rise in temperatures could completely disrupt life as we know it, if we continue on our present path. Climate change is a creeping threat that won’t be apparent for decades, but, if we wait to act until the crisis is obvious, catastrophe will already be inevitable. The alarming thing is that so little is happening when the political situation seems to be favorable to action. It is clear that the government understands the environmental and economic issues perfectly well but they are unwilling to put plans into action to fight off disaster. If we don’t fix the problems now, America could be like the boiled frog, not realizing its danger until it is too late.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Trials By Firefighters
The controversy over the New Haven multiple choice standardized testing firefighters are put through has reached a new level of chaos. Lani Guiner and Susan Strum forcefully expressed their opinions of the standardized test in the article “Trial By Firefighters”. Which, not only does the test decide which firefighter is ready for a promotion, the results have had consistently polar results when it comes to a white or a minority. Recently, the Supreme Court ruled for the test needing to stay in effect to help add rigor to the promotion expectations by using book smarts. With this a new question arises, if firefighters are mainly using street smarts and problem solving on the job, why would it be necessary to test them with book smarts to account for sixty percent of their promotional scorings? By using common sense and logic, one would come to the conclusion that it doesn’t. Standardized testing may have worked at some point in history however, with a fast paced society around, it contradicts most tools you need in life to be successful. Firefighters should not be tested at all with book knowledge. Doing this would eliminate the races getting treated differently and even the playing fields. This is not to say however, that firefighters should not have some sort of mental challenge. Firefighters need to be tested by problem solving under pressure in addition to tests done about the city, with various facts about the buildings included.
“Trials By Firefighter” feels as if the authors are trying to control your opinions bluntly. It is obvious that Guiner and Strum feel strongly about the issue, so much so that in many instances it felt as if they were fighting for a couple different issues instead of just focusing in on one and really going at it. At times throughout the article, it was a struggle to differentiate whether they were fighting because the tests were racist, illogical, or unneeded. The most troubling part as a reader comes with the last line, “In so doing, city officials demonstrate that their decisions are wiser than the Supreme Court’s.” In adding this last line to their article, it opened a whole new can of worms. Was the article talking about the issues within the test the whole time or was it trying, and epically failing, to make the reader realize the Supreme Court serves no actual justice when the city makes better judgment calls anyways?
“Trials By Firefighter” feels as if the authors are trying to control your opinions bluntly. It is obvious that Guiner and Strum feel strongly about the issue, so much so that in many instances it felt as if they were fighting for a couple different issues instead of just focusing in on one and really going at it. At times throughout the article, it was a struggle to differentiate whether they were fighting because the tests were racist, illogical, or unneeded. The most troubling part as a reader comes with the last line, “In so doing, city officials demonstrate that their decisions are wiser than the Supreme Court’s.” In adding this last line to their article, it opened a whole new can of worms. Was the article talking about the issues within the test the whole time or was it trying, and epically failing, to make the reader realize the Supreme Court serves no actual justice when the city makes better judgment calls anyways?
Obama's Big Missile Test
Op Ed #4
Obama’s Big Missile Test
By Philip Taubman
A world without nuclear weapons is believed to be a world without war. This assertion has been made hypothetically for the past decade, yet it is only now within our reach. President Obama recently outlined a plan in Prague that might make this peaceful vision a reality. Many struggle, however, calling this vision, “peaceful.” Philip Taubman, author of the article Obama’s Big Missile Test, questions the validity of Obama’s attempts to remove all nuclear weapons off the face of the earth as well as whether or not his attempts are peaceful at all. His response to President Obama’s arms reduction is not stated plainly, yet the evidence he offers and the intended tone of the article reflect a negative stance on the issue. Taubman emphasizes how Obama has very little support from Congress and the Pentagon, and his influence on the periodic Nuclear Posture Review, a handbook issued by the Pentagon that regulates nuclear production, must be hindered. Taubman continues to stress that a world without nuclear weapons is not a peaceful world. A large nuclear stock has in previous years been an intimidation factor, especially during the Cold War. The United States has one of the largest and most advanced nuclear arsenals in the world, which despite the current economic turmoil has kept countries such as North Korea and Iran from taking over. Removing this arsenal would be devastating to not only our homeland security, but to the security of the world. Obama’s arms reduction plan seems irrational to Democrats and Republicans alike, and puts the well- being of our country at risk. His plan is raising concern to the public who are now wondering whose side Obama is on.
Although Philip Taubman did not openly state his opinion in the article, it can easily be inferred by his tone that he was concerned about the issue and disagreed with Obama’s plan. The article was well written and factual, and contained no opinionated statements. Taubman did, however, use factual evidence to reveal his opinion. A note at the bottom of the article stated that Philip Taubman is a consulting professor at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation. His position there seems to parallel with his perspectives on international security. His position also adds validity to his claims, because he must be knowledgeable about international security to work in that field. Taubman makes his opinion visible also by making slight jabs at Obama. He hints at Obama’s apparent lack of experience in foreign affairs, and mocks his vision of a world with no nuclear weapons. The article presents Obama as almost naïve. Each comment directed toward President Obama was, however, backed by fact.
Obama’s Big Missile Test
By Philip Taubman
A world without nuclear weapons is believed to be a world without war. This assertion has been made hypothetically for the past decade, yet it is only now within our reach. President Obama recently outlined a plan in Prague that might make this peaceful vision a reality. Many struggle, however, calling this vision, “peaceful.” Philip Taubman, author of the article Obama’s Big Missile Test, questions the validity of Obama’s attempts to remove all nuclear weapons off the face of the earth as well as whether or not his attempts are peaceful at all. His response to President Obama’s arms reduction is not stated plainly, yet the evidence he offers and the intended tone of the article reflect a negative stance on the issue. Taubman emphasizes how Obama has very little support from Congress and the Pentagon, and his influence on the periodic Nuclear Posture Review, a handbook issued by the Pentagon that regulates nuclear production, must be hindered. Taubman continues to stress that a world without nuclear weapons is not a peaceful world. A large nuclear stock has in previous years been an intimidation factor, especially during the Cold War. The United States has one of the largest and most advanced nuclear arsenals in the world, which despite the current economic turmoil has kept countries such as North Korea and Iran from taking over. Removing this arsenal would be devastating to not only our homeland security, but to the security of the world. Obama’s arms reduction plan seems irrational to Democrats and Republicans alike, and puts the well- being of our country at risk. His plan is raising concern to the public who are now wondering whose side Obama is on.
Although Philip Taubman did not openly state his opinion in the article, it can easily be inferred by his tone that he was concerned about the issue and disagreed with Obama’s plan. The article was well written and factual, and contained no opinionated statements. Taubman did, however, use factual evidence to reveal his opinion. A note at the bottom of the article stated that Philip Taubman is a consulting professor at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation. His position there seems to parallel with his perspectives on international security. His position also adds validity to his claims, because he must be knowledgeable about international security to work in that field. Taubman makes his opinion visible also by making slight jabs at Obama. He hints at Obama’s apparent lack of experience in foreign affairs, and mocks his vision of a world with no nuclear weapons. The article presents Obama as almost naïve. Each comment directed toward President Obama was, however, backed by fact.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
The Human Equation
As many of you may know; Obama is pressing to pass another stimulus. The whole country is impatiently watching and waiting for this so-called elixir for our economy. Even the economic experts of our nation are calling the end to this recession imminent. Amidst this optimism, Bob Herbert calls for a reconsideration of this euphoric attitude and reveals that an economic recovery is far more difficult than simply passing a few plans. What Herbert concentrated on was employment. He argues that Obama’s stimulus and other economic plans are all missing the “human element”, which is to say that they all ignore the importance and the severity of the unemployment rates. He also argues that the stimulus allocates too little to address this employment problem. Ultimately, Herbert wants the nation to reassess its approach to this economic recession and put employment as one of its top issues. He believes that joblessness is the main obstacle to economic recovery.
I believe Herbert makes a very good point in addressing the lack of positive results from Obama’s economic plans. I thought he does a really good job in pointing out the problem and offering a solution. He first supports his claim with statistics and then he explains why these statistics are important. He states that unemployment rates are important because a healthy economy needs people driving it. He also offers a solution to the problem; This solution he calls “rebuilding America”. In this proposal, Herbert affirms that the government should conduct programs that would get jobless people simple jobs such as repairing, designing, etc. Overall my beliefs are along with that of Herbert’s. I also believe that our economic problem could not be solved b just giving money to the free market, but rather it should be solved by getting people back into the free market.
I believe Herbert makes a very good point in addressing the lack of positive results from Obama’s economic plans. I thought he does a really good job in pointing out the problem and offering a solution. He first supports his claim with statistics and then he explains why these statistics are important. He states that unemployment rates are important because a healthy economy needs people driving it. He also offers a solution to the problem; This solution he calls “rebuilding America”. In this proposal, Herbert affirms that the government should conduct programs that would get jobless people simple jobs such as repairing, designing, etc. Overall my beliefs are along with that of Herbert’s. I also believe that our economic problem could not be solved b just giving money to the free market, but rather it should be solved by getting people back into the free market.
Op-Ed Entry Four
Sarah Reichenbach
Op - Ed Entry Four
July 12, 2009
AP Language
Clean, Sexy Water
By: Nicholas D. Kristoff
Published: July 11, 2009
Even when he was left with nothing Scott Harrison truly gave back. A few years ago Scott Harrison wasn't a man who cared about anything but himself; but now he's running his own million dollar charity. While on a trip to South America he under went a spiritual crisis and decided to really give a helping hand. Mr. Harrison volunteered as a photographer for Mercy Ships,his experience while working with a boy who had a tumor that was literally suffocating him effected Mr. Harrison so much he decided to start a charity that would give clean water to the people that need it most. The charity does more than just give drinking water to these people, though. They supply latrines, they teach people how to wash their hands (which cuts back on forty-five percent of diseases), and the clean water helps keep children in school that would normally spend all day fetching clean water for their families. This charity makes sure every dollar donated goes straight to helping the cause. Mr. Harrison can make sure this happens because he uses his 500 most committed donors to covering all administrative cost. Mr. Harrison also is working on a way to show every single person (no matter how small their donation) how their donations help. He hopes to have a website up in september that using google earth will allow them to see how their money is helping these people. In three years Charity Water has managed to raise ten million dollars due to this marketing genius who uses the lastest social networking to get the message out about Charity Water. Charity Water is more than just a helping hand, the people behind Charity Water change lives.
The first article of Kristoff's that I read left me unsure of his ability to write consistently on one topic and make it interesting; with the article "Clean, Sexy Water" the title and the article are a hit and they're both intriguing. "Clean, Sexy Water" was brilliantly informative. The start of the article has a great pace; it sets the tone of the piece by appealing to the everyday audience and then switches the tone to a more enlightening earthy feel. Kristoff does a great job of explaining the charity, why the charity was started, the marketing, and how you can be a part of it. It's an article that will make you want to help Scott Harrison, his eleven employees, and his many volunteer workers. Kristoff writes about an extraordinary cause started by a man who had it all, lost it all, and got in all back again in the name of charity. This is a truly spectacular article.
Op - Ed Entry Four
July 12, 2009
AP Language
Clean, Sexy Water
By: Nicholas D. Kristoff
Published: July 11, 2009
Even when he was left with nothing Scott Harrison truly gave back. A few years ago Scott Harrison wasn't a man who cared about anything but himself; but now he's running his own million dollar charity. While on a trip to South America he under went a spiritual crisis and decided to really give a helping hand. Mr. Harrison volunteered as a photographer for Mercy Ships,his experience while working with a boy who had a tumor that was literally suffocating him effected Mr. Harrison so much he decided to start a charity that would give clean water to the people that need it most. The charity does more than just give drinking water to these people, though. They supply latrines, they teach people how to wash their hands (which cuts back on forty-five percent of diseases), and the clean water helps keep children in school that would normally spend all day fetching clean water for their families. This charity makes sure every dollar donated goes straight to helping the cause. Mr. Harrison can make sure this happens because he uses his 500 most committed donors to covering all administrative cost. Mr. Harrison also is working on a way to show every single person (no matter how small their donation) how their donations help. He hopes to have a website up in september that using google earth will allow them to see how their money is helping these people. In three years Charity Water has managed to raise ten million dollars due to this marketing genius who uses the lastest social networking to get the message out about Charity Water. Charity Water is more than just a helping hand, the people behind Charity Water change lives.
The first article of Kristoff's that I read left me unsure of his ability to write consistently on one topic and make it interesting; with the article "Clean, Sexy Water" the title and the article are a hit and they're both intriguing. "Clean, Sexy Water" was brilliantly informative. The start of the article has a great pace; it sets the tone of the piece by appealing to the everyday audience and then switches the tone to a more enlightening earthy feel. Kristoff does a great job of explaining the charity, why the charity was started, the marketing, and how you can be a part of it. It's an article that will make you want to help Scott Harrison, his eleven employees, and his many volunteer workers. Kristoff writes about an extraordinary cause started by a man who had it all, lost it all, and got in all back again in the name of charity. This is a truly spectacular article.
The King Is Dead, Long Live the King
This opinion editorial was different than most I had read. Firstly, the author seemed to have very little, if any, purpose for writing this editorial. Also, the article truly intrigued me. He described how the legend lived on after the death of superstar Elvis Presley and how he believes Michael Jackson will similarly follow in his footsteps. The author also went on to describe how ironically they are related by marriage; Lisa Marie Presley married Michael Jackson uniting the two legendary men.
I believe the author may have wanted to compare and contrast the two legend's deaths. They are, and will be, very similar characters in history. Although they came from two very different musical and ethnic backgrounds, Michael Jackson and Elvis Presley will be legends in the music and entertainment industry for a very long time. After his death, Elvis's manager was quoted saying, it's not the end. Likewise, Michael Jackson left over 200 tracks left unpublished. Even though Michael was a legend, he still has some very large shoes to fill if he is going to upstage Elvis.
I believe the author may have wanted to compare and contrast the two legend's deaths. They are, and will be, very similar characters in history. Although they came from two very different musical and ethnic backgrounds, Michael Jackson and Elvis Presley will be legends in the music and entertainment industry for a very long time. After his death, Elvis's manager was quoted saying, it's not the end. Likewise, Michael Jackson left over 200 tracks left unpublished. Even though Michael was a legend, he still has some very large shoes to fill if he is going to upstage Elvis.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Op Ed 4
When Gail Collins wrote her column Michael, a Foreign Affair, Michael Jackson had just passed away less than two weeks before. Beginning by mocking CNN, Collins catches her readers' attention, and more than likely angers them. Collins' satirical comments about Jackson's death may be true, but are not necessary to say so soon. Whenever someone famous dies, the media is instantly involved, reporting on new controversies and rumors with no remorse. Collins is right when she pokes fun at Jackson's dermatologist and a few that spoke at his funeral, but everyone gets carried away, especially when there's money and attention involved.
Collins acts far more superior than the all other reporters, writing about how she would do things differently if in charge, and acts as if Jackson's death had absolutely no affect on her. While her point about the Foreign Affairs Committee is completely valid, Collins needs to chill. Her article will do nothing to slow the Jackson mania that has overtaken the media, and, if anything, generate more publicity for those seeking it by becoming involved in Jackson's memorial. Jackson was incredibly famous, but his death, like all others, will soon cease to be a money making news story, and Collins needs to sit back and wait for that day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)