Latke or Hamantash?

As I sat here thinking about famous debates of American history, I could only think of only major political events that stirred up debates that were quite serious. I decided to go with famous debates that were quite entertaining but yet still enabled to make a outstanding impact on society. As I googled "funniest debates in history" I stumbled upon a great book entitled The Great Latke and Hamantash Debate by Ruth Cernea. Wondering why I had never heard of such a debate I decided to read up on it.

In November of 1946 at the University of Chicago numerous scholaraly individuals from around the nation gathered together to debate upon the major question. Latke or Hamantash? Basically, which is the more worthy food the potato pancake or the triangle purim pastry? It is said that "The latke and the hamantash are here revealed as playing a critical role in everything from Chinese history to the Renaissance, the works of Jane Austen to constitutional law." Scholars are frustrated with the question as the "latke" is proven more worthy with evidence that it is the circle of perfection (Plato's ideal form). However, there have been many attempts to counteract this argument.

Neverthless, this debate has impacted history and society. Initially started in 1946, the main purpose/goal of the debate was to "foster a sense of community" between Jewish students and professors at the University of Chicago, which has been an issue of concern for the student body. During that time, diversity and equality was a major concern.The debate has managed to acheive its goal plus more as it not only established a sense of community between the Jewish Students and professors at the University of Chicago, but has become, for the past six decades, an annual event that has permeated through countless institutions/colleges.

The AIDS Scare

I did some minor research about the early '80s and found the scare that touched everyone in the United States. Once called the Gay Related Immuno Deficiency, the AIDS epidemic had killed 171 people in the United States by 1980 and was spreading very fast. This scare came at a time where the civil rights movement had just hit its peak and Americans were not living together in peace. There were many racial and sexual tensions that made this AIDS epidemic a lot more violent than it needed to be.
In today's society, race and sexual preference is not as big of a conflict as it was in the early 80's. AIDS greatly increased some of the battles that gays had went through, especially with this deadly diesease. Imagine living in the world around that time, the discrimination must have been crazy. In America, you couldn't be black, gay, or a woman without facing some sort of everyday discrimination.
Debates were widespread and violent; it was just a time in US culture when many Americans hated eachother. We have forgot about this harsh discrimination now because its not so bad, but back in this time period it must have been hard to walk on the streets without seeing some sort of brutality. Obviously through time we all realized that AIDS wasn't a "gay" disease and a lot of the violence towards gays has definitely stopped. We have come a long way as a society and to take a look back at a big epidemic like AIDS makes us realize the types of violence and debates that we once were faced with. Take a second to realize what it might've been like to live in a time period like the 80's. Especially if you were black, gay, or female.

Watergate

In June of 1972, Richard Nixon was involved with a scandal that stunned the nation. He was caught and arrested after breaking and entering into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate hotel in Washington D.C. Him and his so called, "plumbers" who were in charge of plugging political leaks, tried to get away with fraud in the White House. After being caught, Nixon was also found guilty of many other charges such as espionage, sabotage, and illegal wiretapping. This scandal was huge because Americans learned that there were tricks being made in the White House. Americans felt lied to and betrayed. A president is supposed to be honest and loyal to the country he or she is leading. Nixon's actions proved that you can not always trust the one who is at the head of a country.
Richard Nixon resigned on August 9, 1974 knowing that what he had done was unacceptable. Watergate was a huge issue in American history that may sometimes be overlooked. It's impact on American's was immense. Now that this has happened, the President's actions are probably monitored a lot heavily then it did prior to the Watergate scandal. Even though it had nothing to do with war, Watergate was a big event that happened in America and it's impact changed how the White House is ran today.

Lost and Forgotten: Elian Gonzalez

In 2000 a young Cuban boy by the name of Elian Gonzalez made headlines all over the news and had many people voicing their opinions. In case you forget, this boy was coming over to America from cuba with his mother and ten others. All but he and the boats operator died during the trip. Two fishermen spotted this boy in the ocean and dropped him in INS. He was than sent to live with his great uncle in Miami. His father called the United States of America and stated that he did not know that his son was leaving with his ex wife and should be immediately returned to cuba to be with him. His great uncle, along with the rest of the nation, believed that he should stay in Miami and get out of Cuba. There was great debate, I remember seeing this on CNN and laughing. The Cuban government, the American government, his father, his grandmothers, and his great uncle all began to debate about the fate of this boy. I thought that the world was so opinionated about this little boy who meant nothing to them and it was topping the news world. If I was to mention the name Elian Gonzalez i guarantee that no body would know who I was talking about, yet it made such a big headline back in 2000.

The Rape of Nanking

On December 13, 1937, the republic of China's capital, Nanking, fell to the Imperial Japanese Army. After this the imperial army wanted to find all the Chinese soldiers disguised as civilians so they begin executing men they felt were lying. Very similar to the way Saddam executed people in his administration when he thought they were spies. The massacre lasted about six weeks. At first men who were thought to be soldiers were killed, but then the army began killing women and children also. Soon after more and more people were being executed. Women were now being raped before murdered. Rapes were happening at a rate of about a thousand cases a night. Along with raping the women, they would also mutilate them before ending their life. They would use their swords to cut off the womens' breasts and disfigure their faces. Cases were reported of women literally being torn open from their vagina. After all was said and done, over two hundred thousand Chinese citizens were killed. That comes out to over thirty thousand men, women, and children a week. It became known as the rape of Nanking. Foreign residents living in Nanking wrote about what they saw. Robert Wilson wrote this in a letter to his family: "The slaughter of civilians is appalling. I could go on for pages telling of cases of rape and brutality almost beyond belief. Two bayoneted corpses are the only survivors of seven street cleaners who were sitting in their headquarters when Japanese soldiers came in without warning or reason and killed five of their number and wounded the two that found their way to the hospital." Even after all this, not many people know what happened in Nanking, though about 25 years earlier the titanic made headlines world wide. Why is it that if we aren't affected by an event, whether it be politically, economically, etc, we tend to play the ignorance is bliss card and go along with our business. Why is it that i learned every detail about the war of 1812, and not once throughout high school did i hear anything about Nanking? Knowledge is power, and as a whole, the more we know about each other, past, present, and future, the better chance we have of living in harmony. And even better are our chances of learning from others mistakes so history doesn't repeat itself.

Middle East: Then, Now and Later

In the post WWI years (1919-1924) there was controversy over control of oil concessions in Iran. Dating back to 1872, Russia and Britain had been fighting over control and influence in Iran. Through several wars with the Iranian government, Russia had gained influence and land in the northern provinces of Iran. After the discovery of oil in the Middle East, Britain had made its first concession in Iran through private investor, Baron Julius de Reuter, in 1872. Leading up to WWI the British government had taken over concessions from private investors for fear of them selling out to foreign competitors, mainly France and The United States.
After WWI and the Bolshevik revolution, Iran was looking to be rid of British and Russian domination. Russia had pulled out their military forces and the Iranians looked at the new Soviet government as an ally, but still mistrusted Russian policy. Britain was looking to take over more of Iran. The Iranian government and Moslem leaders looked to the American capital system as their only hope and went at great lengths to acquire US investments and concessions. Unlike the British, the American government gave no official support to private investors and kept true to its foreign policy and did not get involved in governmental affairs. They stayed true to the open door policy of the time and did not request a military presence or government officials.
After more than one hundred years we are still fighting for oil. It is just a shame that we have changed our tactics to those that the British Empire used. We have obviously regressed in the situation, and as oil reserves are being depleted it will only get worse.

1929 vs 2008

The financial panic of 1929, which many people refer to as Black Tuesday, left many people in total shock. Foolish speculation in the markets caused a run on banks when stocks suddenly became worthless. This caused a spiraling effect that undoubtedly sent the economy into abysmal failure. The average family went from easy subsistence to desperation for food in months. Unemployment skyrocketed and businesses folded in record numbers. The people, who were otherwise satisfied with the government
for the majority of the century, quickly turned against it and voted the Republicans out of power. "Hoovervilles" formed, which were regarded by some historians as the first housing projects in the United States. People were upset, and had no hope for the future. Does this sound like something we may be experiencing now?

The current financial crisis has very similar antecedent causes to the Great Depression. Speculation in the housing market, which many regarded as an investment "that could only go up," caused many homebuilding companies to declare bankruptcy. Couple this with the subprime mortgage industry's collapse, and the economy hits a six-year low. Although most economists won't classify the current crisis a depression, the effects are still evident; rapid layoffs and tumbling markets make headlines almost every day. Families have to relocate in order to find employment. Private investment into new production is at a standstill. The worst effects of the recession are still to come.

Similar to the Great Depression, the current recession is seeing a new change in political preference in voting. Popular opinion states that new leadership is needed to drive the nation out of its economic and political problems. Whether this is a valid implication or not has yet to be proven yet, but so far the events leading up to this moment imply one thing; history is repeating itself, whether for better or worse.

The way people react to a crisis can usually be linked to a previous related crisis. For instance, fears of a war in the beginning of the decade fueled anti-conscription movements. Recent controversy over an intercontinental missile defense system has Russians and Americans alike panicking. Outrageous oil prices are nudging Congress to find a solution, albeit different from the oil embargo they errantly proposed. The current financial crisis and the general population's reaction to it must mirror the previous recessions before it. Savings are increasing while consumer spending drops further.

On a personal level, I see the effects of the recession in my every day life. For one, my uncle was forced to quit his job in the last few months. My friends who are looking for summer jobs are having a hard time finding businesses who will pay for their help. My brother, who is a geology researcher at Princeton, is finding grant money scarce during these times. My good family friend, who invested a large amount of money in the Florida real estate boom, is now left with cheap properties and a delayed retirement. Amidst all of these changes that everyday people must endure, there is some hope; economies operate in cycles, and it is only a matter of time before prosperity graces us with her presence once again.

The Stock Market Crash

Looking back over the history of America it is hard to miss this event. I can't think of another event that has caused so much stress and disorder in people lives. Uncertain what would come next people lived their lives in a sort of flux. Much like the war in Iraq this hit hard and affected most of the people in the country. One day while there stockswere high and there bank acounts overflowed, the next; the stock market crashed and their money was gone in no time. Leaving people uncertain and looking to recover from this shocking change of events.

The Iraq war affects so many people in a negative way, while it is hard to find an event that changes peoples lives as much as a war the great depression after the stock market crash October 29 1929 black Tuesday. Many people believed that depressions had come and this would be over soon, they just had to wheather the storm. Most people seemed to feel the same way about the Iraq war, it won't last long and we will have our victory soon. It seems that indeed we will win in Iraq just like America survived the depression it is only a matter of how much time and soldiers we are willing to commit to the fight.

Uncertainty Today...

Even though Prof. McCann wants us to write about how uncertain life was many years ago, I feel it is uncertain today. I could talk about how we could have easily lost the Revolutionary War and Britan's revenge on us. I could talk about the Civil War and how we could live in a completely different country today. But, I feel uncertain about life in America today. It could be paranoia from seeing the black smoke of the twin towers from my very home, but I saw how easily people panic or freeze in a situation like that. People were running out of my school, and people were on the ground crying. Every firetruck, ambulance, and police car was leaving the town to go help in the city. To a 7th grader (me) it seemed as if the world was ending. There was nothing I could think of, there was nothing for me to reason. What was stopping a plane from hitting my school, or my house? What was stopping an Islamic extremist from walking into my smalltown public school and killing me and all of my friends. How would I know the differece between a terrorist and a normal middle-eastern immigrant? If our stock market crashed and our country went into a depression, would my family be able to make money? Would I be able to eat? Fortunately, my grandfather had a house and food on the dinner table when he grew up in the middle of the depression.

When people become desperate, they can do horrible and evil things. Just because we don't see starving people or ever see ourselves starving, doesn't mean it will never happen. In the words of Kanye West "Nothing is ever promised tomorrow, today."

My great grandparents were murdered by a man who was addicted to drugs, broke, and homeless. He was desperate for money so he broke into their house, tied them up, beat them untill they gave him everything, and then executed them. Desperate for money...

One day we may all be desperate....

A Different Kind of Slavery for the Black Woman

The role of the Black woman during slavery was much different than that of the Black man. Although a black man was bound to cultivating the land, the black woman was often inside in close proximity to their white masters. This made black women vulnerable to the vicious sexual attacks of their apathetic masters. At this point in time in the the mid and late 1800s in the United States black women were viewed as mere property to their masters; they were to clean the house from top to bottom as well as fulfill the sexual needs of their masters - those that did not were beaten, sold, or killed. Black women in America were identified as "promiscuous" (African American Women & the Metalanguage of Race) and accused of having "wicked lifestyles". This labeling of an entire race and gender lessened the black woman to a role equivalent to that of an animal, therefore condoning their objectionable advances toward black women. Even statutory law did not stand behind one young black woman enslaved at the age of fourteeen and forced to bear two of her masters children. Young Celia of 19 years was hung after being denied the rights granted her by Missouri law that "any woman" is "protected from attempts to ravish, rape, or defile" after accidently killing and intentionally burning to ashes her master. Clearly, the law did not stand behind a black woman that was raped.

This conflict between the black woman and the United States at this time was one of the largest injustices that have somehow attained a level of aninimity amongst the American people today. Black women at this time tried to counteract their (unearned) stereotype as immoral, "promiscuous" beings by becoming "super moral." Yet unfortunately today even black women have forgotten the "reputation" they were once given, reducing themselves to erotic dances in popular music videos. Indeed, this subject in US History is one that would not hurt for many to revisit.


African-American Women's History and the Metalanguage of Race
Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham
Signs, Vol. 17, No. 2. (Winter, 1992), pp. 251-274.

Cuban Missile Crisis, the Moon, and Civil Rights

I thought it would be interesting to see what was happening in 1962, the year both my parents were born. What I found was that at that time, America was in the Cuban Missile Crisis. The President at the time was Kennedy. Basically, America was in fear of being attacked by the Soviet Union by a missile. Kennedy ordered the blockade of Cuba to prevent missile deployment. The parallel I find is the terrorist attacks that we are trying to evade. As much as I would rather not being in this war, this war is an active way to prevent other terrorist attacks to occur. Just like Kennedy stopped the missile crisis, to stop this terrorist crisis we have to be in this war.

At the same time as the Cuban Missile Crisis, John Glen became the first American to ever revolve around the world, and three times too. I can't really find a parallel to this but there is a parallel to the next headline. In 1962, the first ever African American was registered into a college. Today, soon enough, we will be inducting an African American or a woman into the White House, something that has never happened in the history of America. Until 1962, no African American had ever gone to a college until that year.

Yellow Journalism

When we were assigned to look to the past for inspiration, for our next blog, I immediately thought about the Spanish American War, in the late 1800’s. As a child I always loved that time period in history everything seemed so radical and fantastic. Theodore Roosevelt was a hero on a horse and the News Papers were dressing up the “facts” to create sensational stories that riled up the people of the time. Yellow journalism was the name given to all the exaggerated fairy tales that the two leading New York Newspapers were writing. Hertz and Pulitzer were the leading yellow papers and they became unbelievably wealthy from their stories.
Even though I think journalism should be truthful and informative, I sometimes long for the times of sensational news. I think that the media is the driving influence on most people’s opinions. The Spanish American War is a perfect example of that. I sometimes wonder if the press decided to report differently about Iraq would American’s feel differently?

Silver and Gold

The presidential election of 1896, although it isn’t often remembered, is one of the most important in history. At the time, the United States economy ran on a system of bimetallism. That means that American money was backed by both Gold and Silver. However, the Republican candidate, William McKinley, was in favor of adopting the Gold Standard for American currency. The democratic candidate, William Jennings Bryan, was passionately opposed to it.
During his campaign, Bryan made his “Cross of Gold” speech the night before the election, which is thought to be one of the most passionate and persuasive speeches delivered. However, the people were not voting at that particular moment, and there were a few more hours of debate after his speech. The last speech of the night spoke in favor of the Gold standard.
In the end, the Gold standard won, and on March 14, 1990, the Gold Standard Act was signed. For thirty-three years the American currency was on the Gold standard, until Franklin D. Roosevelt repealed the act.
Imagine living in America at a time when the nation’s currency was in question. People must have felt similar uncertainty and doubt that many of us feel today. Many everyday citizens probably didn’t know what to think, or which system would be better. After all, what did they know about country’s supply of Gold and Silver? It’s hard to imagine what the consequences of a major decision that will affect the entire country and maybe even the world will be - whether the question is should America use the bimetallism system or the Gold standard, or if it’s should or shouldn’t we be in Iraq.
Also similarly to the war in Iraq and the election now, Americans living in 1896 knew the outcome of the election was going to affect their lives, but they weren’t sure how. Maybe the stock market wouldn’t have crashed in 1929 if Bryan won the election.

Blog 2: Epidemic in Philly

I chose to look back all the way to the issues of 1793. Interestingly enough, I found the yellow fever epidemic of 1793 which took place in Philadelphia and is the largest epidemic in the history of the United States. This was around the time that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were stationed in Philadelphia, and they, along with 20,000 others fled to the countryside when death rates reached nearly 5000 people. At this time, Benjamin Rush believed that blacks could not contract the disease, so they were commissioned to care for the sick as nurses, drivers, and grave diggers. This belief, however, was obviously proved wrong as 240 blacks died of the fever.

Although there was not much information offered on this topic and it occurred quite a long time ago, the location of it surprises me that I never learned about it in class or had it at least mentioned at some point.

A Lost Moment in History

While researching important dates in history, I decided to research 1913. Don't ask me why I chose this date, it was just the first number to pop in my head. My first result when searching headlines from 1913 was titled "The Great Storm of 1913." I had absolutely no clue what this was about, so I clicked on it. Apparently on November 7-10, 1913 a blizzard struck with hurricane force winds that devastated the Great Lakes Basin. It remains the deadliest disaster to ever hit the great lakes, killing more than 250 people, destroying 19 ships, and stranding 19 more. The financial loss was an estimated 5 million US dollars, equal to approximately $100 million today. I was amazed to discover such an event because you would think that a disaster like that would still be mentioned in some classes. Granted along these times there was plenty happening with World Wars and the depression heading the early 1900's, but I feel this is pretty major.
The parallel that I made with this article to today is the comparison between this and Hurricane Katrina. Katrina struck the US back in August of 2005, killing approximately 1800, and causing 81.2 billion dollars. I know Katrina makes the Great Storm of 1913 seem minimal, but thinking harder, they have a lot in common. Clearly the New Orleans region was much more populated and developed in 2005 then that of the Great Lakes region in 1913. Had this storm struck the Great Lakes in 2005, I think the damage may have been much closer to that of Hurricane Katrina, and thus becoming one of our countries worst natural disasters. I wanted to just mention this date in history to honor people killed from this tragic event that may have been forgotten over the years.

WW2, Supporting Our Allies or Money Machine

Most people understand that the United States entered the second War World to help restore peace and order on the Earth.  While the facts point to Germany becoming overly powerful and threatening the safety of our nation as well as all other nations as well, know that during this time the United States was still in Depression during the beginning  of the war.  We did not really have the money to go to war, and as the Germans and their allies poked and prodded the U.S. we remained out of the conflict until President Roosevelt (and eventually Truman)  saw a different outcome of the war, which is war production yielding wealth and escape from our Depression.  Whether this was conscientiously or not does not matter because the war, although extremely bloody and long drawn out, the war did boost the U.S. from its Depression back into the thriving market it was before the Crash. 

This resembles the War in Iraq.  There was a big conflict between a few countries, and let me say that this conflict was nothing new, it had been going on.  The U.S. stayed out of it while we handled our own problems for a little while but as soon as a president saw some money in the conflict, the U.S. stuck its nose in to try and delegate.  This turned out to be very costly.  Iraq sent the kamikaze rouges and destroyed  some very famous structures in our nation.  Pre-was our market was dropping some and some said it could possibly lead to another crash.  Without support Bush sent troops over and now instead of the war machine making out nation money, gas prices have sky rocketed which has damaged our market quite heavily, and well as the astronomical growth in our nation's debt.  If the war had been short and less costly it may have been beneficial to the U.S. and our market, but the facts stand that it has gone on long enough.  No good has come of the drawn out war.  The country shouldn't exist right now and their oil should have already been claimed as the U.S.'s rightful resource.

Making a Profit

“Why are we still over there?” I can’t even tell you how many times I have heard this statement over the past few months. One reasonable answer could be greed and profiteering. Although it is not a highly discussed issue, in my opinion, war profiteering is playing a major war in the war in Iraq. Private military contractors and corporations continue involve themselves in the war, despite putting their workers and American soldiers at risk. Even private armies, including ground support, mercenary soldiers, and interrogators, are being employed in Iraq. Private military contractors and mercenaries generate more than an estimate $100 billion dollars worldwide. Obviously, it is a very a very profitable market. It seems that the U.S. states government has become increasingly reliant upon these privatized companies, and since these companies are reaping such huge profit, why should they want to pull out? In the past Halliburton made huge profits in Kosovo, and now, in Iraq, private companies like Blackwater, Vinnell, Erinys, and CACI, are making large profits, that is, for as long as the war rages on. These private companies seem to be in it for themselves, even endangering more American lives in Iraq. Those reasonable for the torture incident at Abu Ghraib were hired by CACI, and this incident, undoubtedly, sparked more hatred from Iraqi insurgents toward American troops. Some companies essentially hold the military at ransom, overcharging for meals and gasoline. But, thanks to greed and profit, and do not see an end for Iraq anytime soon, and I feel that many of the people behind privatized military contractors are hoping that it won’t end for a long time, even though many are dying each day.

Greed has caused big business to take advantage of people, even if it meant risk innocent lives. This was evident beginning in 1908, when times we hard in America and people had a difficult time putting food on their tables. During these times, businesses used the situation of people to earn a greater profit. This is evidence by the use of child labor in work place such as factories and mines. Business owners did not worry about the ethical problems involved in this practice, such as injuries and deaths of children, because they themselves were earning more money through the cheap labor. Because of the economic situation at the time, families needed the extra income to survive, even though they didn’t want to endanger their children. Had no laws been passed, child labor might still be a problem today because people seem want anything that will make them a profit, whether that be children laborers or a war.

What has Iraq Brought us to?

I read two very interesting media reports about the war and what exactly we are to do about it. The first article stemmed from a Washington Talk Radio News Service that basically summed up General Petraeus' address to the Senate and what exactly we were to do about this war. Of course Hillary Clinton and John McCain were there to show their support and also give some insight for their ongoing presidential battle. Basically General Petraeus spoke a bunch about how "battlefield calculus" is being used to analyze if we are to bring home troops or if we are going to have to stay in Iraq. Now of course there are very many different opinions to this, basically outlined by Clinton and McCain's views. Clinton talked a lot about how we had to start looking at the withdrawal of our troops, and McCain praised the surge of our troops and the success we have.
Now the other article I read was a blog about the statements made in Petraeus' address and there was a spin. The contrast came in what Hillary was actually saying. The blog stated how Hilliary thought the war was lost, how McCain wants to stay, and how Obama is cautious.

My main problem with the blog is that it spins a few words in Hillary's case and also comments about Obama, who wasn't even at the address to the senate. Now the blog followed with stating something that Bill O'Reilly had said "The loons on the left and many in the corrupt media are lying to you! There is danger ahead. Running away from it will hurt you and your family."

Now Hillary never said much about running away, and Obama said nothing at all, yet this liberal spin is making Hillary out to be a target, while also making O'Reilly sound like a fool. Normally I wouldn't mind this, but I think the effort for support on the democratic side doesn't need to be attacking a Republican "fool". Rather I would say to do things the right way and stop making our presidential candidates to be targets. Instead, make them seem intelligible support what they say, it never looks good when you try and bash the other side.

It's actually quite hard to find any media coverage on the war without a presidential bias on either side. Disappointing.

http://talkradionews.com/2008/04/petraeus-to-the-senate-success-in-iraq-is-fragile/
http://www.newshounds.us/2008/04/08/oreilly_says_hillary_clinton_believes_war_in_iraq_is_lost.php

Hometown Heroes- Blog 1

The war at first impression was something that I didn't understand much. Stemming from years back, I think that I was too immature to really understand some of the immediate causes and effects that the war has. It wasn't until I started seeing a bunch of my high school friends enlist into the war that I payed much attention to it.

A town like mine stems from a lower income and lower educational status in the world. To make it simple we have a lot of factory working parents. It is a small town where everyone knows each other's business and gets along decently well. The support for the war around my town is huge, mainly because a good portion of my school ends up enlisting into the military. I played football with a bunch of my best friends since I was little. Around junior year I started to realize that a number of my best friends had nothing more to look forward to instead of the military. I commend them for their bravery, but I also worry to death that I may attend one of their funerals in the near future.

My main point is that these young friends that I have spent a year in training and then headed right overseas. When I keep in contact, they have changed a bunch. They are no longer kids, they are men that I have the utmost respect for. As for the political side of the war, I'm not sure that I agree with much of the reason's why we are over there. I also don't want to learn much of the political stances of the war mainly due to the fact that I have about 10 friends in Iraq right now. Not saying that I am not open to learn about much of the political sides of our war, just stating that I'd rather support my friends than worry about the reason why they are over in Iraq. I get the majority of the news from my hometown paper, mainly because there is always a writeup about what the war is doing or how my friends are still alive. I try to watch the most unbiased form of news about the war by watching local action news 6, but we all know that being unbiased about the war is virtually impossible. Mainly I have mixed emotions about our war in Iraq, but I will let you know that I have more respect and love for the soldier's that are over there risking their lives everyday.

JAR HEAD

It was always the GI Joe versus the bad guy, the green army men against the tan ones, it was these childhood play times that lead to be instilled with the thought of American superiority in military might. We as children in the country were installed like machines that to be a solider meant to be a protector of peace and all that is good. My childhood, and still much so today, perception of OUR own US soldiers was that they are great, they are the good guys. The recent film “Jar Head” painted quiet a different picture in my mind of our heroic figures protecting our precious freedoms. This movie I believe has affected our nation in many ways. The film came out in the time of our nation’s ongoing war with the Iraqi terrorists. This film is very different from past ones in its portrayal of our nation’s troops. The movies slogan I believe makes a very strong statement, every man fights his own way. This opening statement of the film I think makes a powerful statement saying that the modern solider isn’t like our GI Joes we played with back in the day, these modern soldiers (according to the film) are men who fight alone, not together as a nation, and perhaps for their own reasons, not for our freedoms? The film itself shows the struggles of our soldiers, the effects of time, environment, and the physical and mental toll the war has taken on them. These images of soldiers enduring strains of war show Americans back home that our troops aren’t like the action figures of our youth. I think that this movie showed Americans the truth about our troops, and in some cases I think that it did us justice. Many people have become more aware of the sacrifice our troops have made for us. many Americans now respect our nations warriors with a greater degree, which in turn brings our country together as a loyal nation, not a divided government system.

Fox News vs CNN

Looking at two major mainstream news networks, you can immediately analyze their bias before even reading a story. I looked at CNN and Fox News, and immediately saw differences just in the headlines of stories and the website. The main page of CNN’s website had a picture of Obama on it, while Fox News’ website showed a picture of McCain on the main page. Fox News is notoriously more conservative while CNN is on the moderate to liberal side of the political spectrum.

One thing that I found very interesting on CNN’s website was that there was a special page created just for the War in Iraq. It contains news articles, casualty lists, alerts, videos, and more. So while I was looking at it trying to find a recent news story to write about, I noticed that all of the stories under “breaking news” were from May 2003. I was confused, because it is not like this was a random website that someone just decided to stop updating. This was CNN. When I scrolled back to the top of the page, I saw something that said, “This page was archived in May 2003 when President Bush declared an end to major combat. However, the coalition casualties list continues to be updated.” I think that this page alone clearly shows CNN’s stance on the United States in Iraq.

Fox News on the other hand, also has a page dedicated to the War on Terrorism. They even have lovely interactive guides including “Terror Survival Handbook” which says underneath, “Click here to see an interactive guide on how to boost your chances of surviving a terror attack”. The other fun little interactive guide is the “Weapon of Mass Destruction Handbook” which includes everything anyone ever wanted to know about weapons of mass destruction including the history, who has them, and how to protect yourself.

Although this blog post said to analyze two articles, I think that just by analyzing two contrasting websites, one is able to see the opposing views.

Reefer Madness!

In the 20th century, people were confused about the effects of marijuana. When immigrants made it popular and it became more accessible, people became afraid of its effects. This movie is funny, and is exaggerated propaganda to paint marijuana as a drug that can make you a murdering maniac. After the movie was released, many of the states put life sentences or even death sentences for offenses like second-time dealing to a minor or second-time possession of one cigarette. In the 1960's, these laws were scaled way down, since everyone was doing it and there weren't murdering maniacs running around. Watching that movie was hilarious, just because of the way the teenagers would exaggerate their stupidity, and stuff like a fake hit-and-run. Many of my friends would be confused if they lived back then. My friends would've been bitched at to no end if they tried to defend marijuana back then. I found it crazy that the states cracked down on it so badly, and all over crap science and media. I would imagine that time being confusing, if people were swayed that easily and didn't question the facts.

"You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold"

Congress passed the Fourth Coinage Act in 1873. It discontinued the minting of silver money and put America on the gold standard, a monetary system in which banknotes are backed up by a certain weight of gold. Many called this the "Crime of '73." For the next five years, America experienced a depression, and deflation lasted until 1896, with the worst coming with the Panic of 1893.

A large percentage of Americans were not happy with the gold standard, and their discontent culminated at the 1896 Democratic National Convention, where Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan delivered his famous "Cross of Gold" speech. Bryan was a proponent of bimetallism, where banknotes would be backed up by both gold and silver. This would result in inflation, which would make it easier for people, mainly farmers, to pay off their debt.

The economy was definitely a hot topic back in the 19th century, debated on by all of America. For the most part, proponents of the gold standard (mostly urban Easterners) argued that the silver standard would hurt creditors, while "Free Silver" supporters (mostly rural Westerners) argued that the gold standard hurt debtors. This left people as uncertain and frustrated as Iraq, a completely unrelated topic, leaves us today.

Mean Girls

When hearing the title of the popular 2004 movie, Mean Girls, there are two common reactions. The first would be that of a teenage girl saying “OMG I love that movie;” the second reaction coming from an adult, possibly a parent, would reveal severe disgust and outrage at the social horrors encountering teens in high school. It is true that Mean Girls seems like a petty film about overly dramatic girls picking fights with each other to fill their meaningless, materialistic lives, but in reality, this film addresses some major social issues present in high school life that need to be brought to attention. The first issue that this movie brings up is the social hierarchy of high school life. Many adults were shocked that girls could be so cruel, after watching the initial “rituals” that Regina put Cady through. It’s as if Regina had to demean Cady to complete nothingness, so that her life would become “plastic.” In reality, this is not uncommon, because so many high school girls make popularity the main focus of their teenage years. What’s worse is the way in which they achieve this status, which usually comes from humiliating and degrading others. The scenes in which Cady views everyone as animals in the jungle, is representative of the animal like nature of teenage girls. All the fighting that is present amongst the animals in the jungle is present among the girls, except in a deceiving, backstabbing way. This suggests the implication that the roles of gender are reversing in society because men are usually considered to have animal like instincts, such as aggression. In Mean Girls the men are rendered weak and scarred of the women, a perfect example being Regina’s boyfriend’s inability to stand up to her. The girls are the ones causing the riot in the end of the film and the plastics are inducing fear in other students.

The basic meaning of this movie is to show the nature of teenage girls being affected by materialist standards of society. The clips of girls from various clicks talking about Regina’s hair, clothes, boyfriend, etc. show how fascinated girls are with status and material possession. This movie renders the plastics as extreme cases of popularity where the girls are completely fake, hence plastic, and empty on the inside. Their entire essence is therefore dependent on the latest Abercrombie trends and daily gossip.

While Mean Girls and the horror films, Scream and Saw are completely different, they do share some similarities brought up in the critiques. Although I have never seen either movies, I was able to make a connection between the female roles in both genres. The Scream critique says that “The genre of horror films has a fascination with the maternal as the creator, instigator and source of fear.” In Mean Girls the source of fear also comes from the women, hence showing how feminism tries to empower the female as the dominant figure that instills fear. More and more movies are characterizing men as the vulnerable figures, dominated by sadistic women. The Saw critique gives an explanation for the increasing violent nature of films as the result of society’s fear of terrorism. Similarly, the backstabbing nature of the girls in Mean Girls is symbolic of the way women deal with their insecurities and pressures of beauty, image, and popularity. In fact, Mean Girls can be viewed as a mockery of itself, because the goddess-like appearance of the plastics, appeals to insecure girls, therefore, exalting the same high school hierarchy that the film tries to ridicule in the first place. This ultimately produces a cycle where the media only encourages such behaviors in high school girls by creating characters, such as the plastics, which are the epitome of every girl’s secret desire to be the most popular.

Blog 2 : Civil Rights

Civil Rights was a period in American history that changed our image, especially in south. There was lots of racial discrimination going on, and Civil Rights changed that image. Even after Civil Rights, there was still lots racial discrimination going on. Like, African Americans weren't given high position jobs. Civil Rights gave them legal rights to fight back, and government would give their support fully. During 1960s, American was going through one of the scariest times. Thats because our president Kennedy, Civil Rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. were assassinated. They both were with civil rights for African Americans. Eventually in 1964, officially government passed the "Civil Rights Act" which made racial discrimination illegal in theaters, restaurants, hotels, public places, transportation. Civil Rights started during 1957, and in 1964 it ended officially.

source: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcivil64.htm