Inauguration

There is no question that the inauguration of President Obama is a landmark in this nation's history, and that the swearing in of the first African American commander of chief will literally change the face of the United States forever. His approval rating is above and beyond any other President elect, so there is no doubt that the majority of the country is behind him and that there are an unfounded amount of sincere emotions running through the hearts and minds of people who have supported Obama during the arduous and demanding campaign. However, I think that this particular inauguration is shaping out to be too much of a party, when it should be a focus on duty and the rising challenges for the newly elected President during the current economic and military crisis. Obama has given people hope that change is possible within this country, but in the process people seem to have disenfranchised themselves so much that they are not properly dealing with the difficulties this nation faces. 

Assignment #1

Graff and Birkenstein argue that to write academically an individual cannot just simply assert their own ideas, but that they must enter into a conversation by using what others have said as a catalyst for the argument. They also state that disagreeing with other arguments is not a necessity to rhetoric, but that agreeing with others is also a viable launching pad for academic writing, and that all academic writing can succeed through the use of templates. Rhetoric as described in the course description appears to take the shape of being far more studious in premise. There will be a large amount of research and analysis in the course that will strengthen the argument of individuals through various exercises. Between academic writing and the course description of rhetoric there is much overlap pertaining to the process of argument. Research from the class will prove to be incredibly useful in academic writings and will strategically fill in all of the blanks of the templates provided by Graff and Birkenstein. Attending to arguments requires a firm grasp of the material as well as sophisticated thinking and writing that necessitates much practice and instruction.

Michelle Obama DNC Analysis

Michelle Obama did a good job of choosing anecdotes that speak specifically to the demographic that makes up the bulk of the American public. She began her speech referencing her father, a blue-collar worker with disabilities that fought through adversity and still managed to succeed and help her along the way. She connected with the working class, assuring them that the American dream still exists as long as the people are willing to fight “for the world as it should be.” She styled her words with the theme of the campaign, hope, giving an optimistic outlook for the future of the nation, especially for children by saying that they can go as far as the “reach of their dreams.”

Michelle clearly stated that there were needs in the country that have to be dealt with, such as ending the war in Iraq, building a stable and prosperous economy, developing an affordable health care system, and ensuring the greater education of every child from preschool to college. Lastly, she established a value system between her, Barack, and the American people. She spoke of dignity and respect in your actions and your words, and she implored the nation to realize the importance of every individual contribution to the country through service.

Israeli Prime Minister Nominee, Benjamin Netanyahu, is taking, or stealing, some pointers from U.S. President-elect Barack Obama. He’s not doing it politically though (depending on what you personally consider “political” these days.), instead he’s cuing off of the success of the Obama campaign, and modeling his own exactly the same.

While the politics don’t run parallel to that of Obama’s, the website sure does. The
Netanyahu camp has designed a precise, state of the art, homepage replica to that of the Obama campaign.

The site is heavily equip with matching shades of blue, transparent fades creating the backdrop and words in different languages, but pretty much in identical font.
And of course, each page is topped off with a man in a suit. Even the communication functions on the page are alike, citing facebook groups, video, blogs, text messaging, and even twitter, which has only just begun to catch on in Israel. Basically, the aesthetic and utility are indistinguishable.

Awkwardly enough, Netanyahu stands as the most far fetched candidate out of the three prime minister nominees to draw comparison with Barack Obama. Netanyahu has said that if elected he would not partake or advocate further negotiations with Palestine, contesting that they lead nowhere and that it would be more beneficial to focus on economy “until Palestinian attitude changes.” Obama alternatively, made foreign policy dialogue a focal point of his campaign, much like Tzipi Livini, who is also running for Israeli Prime Minister and has vowed to continue the talks with the Palestinians, which she is currently helping to lead.

Netanyahu however, believes the proposed adjustment is a proper substitute for the current Israeli government lead by Ehud Olmert, and that by doing so he is positioning himself as the candidate of new ideas both for Israel and for peace with the Palestinians.
Like Obama- New ideas, peace, happy ending- but a completely different plan of how to get there.

Like in the U.S. presidential election, Netanyahu is also targeting Livini’s similarity between her policies and that of Prime Minister Olmert’s, very much like how Obama portrayed McCain and President George W. Bush as practically being conjoined twins.

“Together we can succeed” is the campaign slogan on the Netanyahu site, echoing Obama’s, “Yes we can,” so the guy is really quite the astute copycat. But at the same time it’s really not that unusual Netanyahu is imitating Obama. After all, Obama won, and Netanyahu wants to win too. “We’re all in the same business, so we took a close look at a guy who has been the most successful” said Ron Dermer, one of Mr. Netanyahu’s top campaign advisers. He’s right- it sure is a business, though I’m still not quite sure it’s suppose to be.

The Fulbright scholarship program is a U.S. government funded international educational grant proposed in 1945 by then Senator J. William Fulbright. The Arkansas Senator believed that after World War II the program was a much needed vehicle for promoting "mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries of the world." Fulbright grants are given to students both domestically and over seas for an assortment of educational purposes, including studies in foreign policy.

Earlier this spring all scholarships originally intended for Palestinian recipients located in the Gaza Strip had been “redirected” to other students because of the conflict in the area. Officials say that because the area is controlled by Palestinian terrorist organization, Hamas, there was no clear telling whether or not the students would be able to leave Gaza. Individuals like thirty year-old Abdulrahman Abdullah on the other hand pleaded their case, saying that he absolutely needed to leave and pursue education.

“If we are talking about peace and mutual understanding, it means investing in people who will later contribute to Palestinian society,” he said. “I am against Hamas. Their acts and policies are wrong. Israel talks about a Palestinian state. But who will build that state if we can get no training?”

The scholarship had been granted to seven individuals in the area, one of which was Hadeel Abukwaik, a 23-year-old engineering software instructor in Gaza. Abukwaik had stayed in Gaza through the winter, passing an opportunity to escape to Egypt with her sister all because the Fulbright agency told her she had to stay put in order to receive the scholarship. Shocked by the initial readdressing of the grants, Abukwaik can now rest at ease and begin her schooling in the United States because all of the scholarships have been reinstated.

Senior American and Israeli officials were outraged when they heard of the grant cancellations, “If you cannot engage young people and give complete horizons to their expectations and their dreams, I don't know that there would be any future for Palestine” said secretary of state Condoleezza Rice.

While the individuals who received the prestigious Fulbright scholarship to study abroad have been granted permission to leave the Gaza strip, there has been no acceleration in authorizing the remaining 600 plus Gazan students with slightly less impressive scholarships the opportunity to leave.

Groups like, Gisha, an Israeli organization that promotes free movement for Palestinians have been called to action to speak out for the trapped students, "Gisha calls on Israel to allow all Palestinian students accepted to universities abroad to exercise their right to leave Gaza and access education, in order to obtain the tools they need to build a better future in the region" said organization head, Sari Bashi.
7 out, 600 plus to go.

Olmert Tries to Resign with a Bang

Ehud Olmert, the former Prime Minister of Israel who has recently resigned from his position after being investigated under suspicion of receiving unlawful sums of money said something this past Monday that had never before been said by any Israeli leader prior to him.
“We have to reach an agreement with the Palestinians, the meaning of which is that in practice we will withdraw from almost all the territories, if not all the territories. We will leave a percentage of these territories in our hands, but will have to give the Palestinians a similar percentage, because without that there will be no peace,” said Olmert as reported by New York Times Journalist, Ethan Bronner.

Olmert castigates Israeli military strategist who for decades he says have been “stuck in the considerations of the 1948 war of Independence.” He believes that military action is obviously no longer the answer to the conflict, but that now Israel and Palestine more than ever must reach an agreement that would unquestionably result in Israel returning the occupied areas of Palestine.

“The time has come to say these things” says Olmert who in accordance with Israeli law has become the leader of an interim government until a new prime minister is appointed and sworn in.

The comments have faced severe criticism (Israeli Newspaper, Haaretz) by many Israelis who think that such comments so close to his departure from the government are ill-timed and not well thought out.

Yossi Beilin, former chairman of the left-wing social democratic Israeli political party, Meretz, said that "Olmert has committed the unforgivable sin of revealing his truce stance on Israel's national interest just when he has nothing left to lose.”

Olmert has guaranteed that his outgoing government will continue to participate in negotiations towards peace with Palestine. However, talks are allegedly not progressing because he lacks full support both from the political body of Israeli administration as well as the people who doubt his moral authority in handling the ongoing conflicts revolving around the state in result of his investigation.

Heads or Tails?

Most audiences will look at No Country for Old Men and see only the simple plot of a fugitive and his two pursuers, but there is more being said and more being asked within the wide open spaces of the film.

The Coens have left all their tricks and ironic jokery behind and the resulting film feels deeper and more personally felt than anything they have done before. The mood is darker and quieter than other projects the two brothers have worked on. It’s not a slap yourself on the knee comedy like The Big Lebowski, it’s not a true crime mobster suspense like Miller’s Crossing, and though there are dashes of black humor dispersed throughout the feature, it’s not remotely as frequent or forcibly placed as exhibited in Fargo. Again Coen fans, this movie is not like Fargo.

The story follows Llewlyn Moss (played by Josh Brolin), a Vietnam veteran who stumbles upon the aftermath of a drug deal gone wrong in the west Texas desert while hunting. The only survivors of the botched transaction are a truck load of heroine, and a briefcase with over $2 million. Electing to take the money and run, Brolin’s character is pursued by bounty hunter Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem). During the chase, police Sheriff, Ed Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones), attempts to track down Brolin, a man in too deep, to assist him in escaping the enclosing grasp of aggression and mayhem.

Javier Bardem steals the show as perhaps the most unnerving screen villain of the year, a sociopath monster who ups the ante in terms of tension by holding a cattle gun to his victims' heads while often flipping a coin to determine who lives and who dies. In one of his final murders, he gives a long speech about causality and fate to his victim. This scene requires the audience to take a second look at what they have been watching. All of a sudden, the film is not just a violent chase film. The film is violence. Each character is a representation of an extreme that creates a trinity of temptation, cynicism and pure, dark, evil.

Tom Long of the Detroit News hails the film as “a cold, rough look at the dissolution of just about everything. It will bother you afterward. It should.” When stepping out the movie theatre, audiences are silent. Each frame is mesmerizing, no character is trivial, and in this day and age, violence survives.