cantOR can ?

Journal 1-6

I. 
               Last week I was very curious about the hostages at the center of the Iran-Contra Scandal. I  already knew that they went through a lot, but what was their day to day life like? What did  they have to endure? What were their living conditions like? After a lot of research, the answers have been found.
               The majority of the people who were taken hostage were Americans, though the rest were mainly Western European. These people were treated quite cruelly, suffering from constant beatings and mock executions. The hostages lived in "cells" and were tortured in ways that should never be mentioned. Several suffered from so much that they actually died. The victims were thrown into the trunks of cars and one captive was once transported in a refrigerator.( Galenet Biography Resource Center) As one can see, these hostages experienced more horror than any person should ever face.

 II.
               Last week was a very interesting week full of politics , elections, and speakers. We watched and learned about different political campaign ads, and we discussed how they can be used to persuade audiences to vote a certain way. Also we took a closer look at the Congressional races in Virginia this fall, and we examined the different candidates' websites and campaign ads. Lastly we started our unit on The Divided State by researching some background information and beginning to watch the movie.

               Out of the three main topics this week, I thought that our discussions on the political campaigns in Virginia were the most interesting. I really liked learning about things that are relevant to us and are relateable. Going into this topic, I was rooting for Eric Cantor, and after spending time in class learning more, I support him even more. He is one of the most powerful men in the House of Representatives and has been through a lot to get there. I totally respect him and wish him the best of luck in the future. When looking at the other two candidates' websites, I thought they looked very unprofessional when compared to Cantor's. I know that these two gentlemen are trying to make a difference in their community, but I just don't think that they stand a chance against Eric. I almost feel that they just got up one morning and said, "I think I will run for Congress today." I feel that because of that, they do not have the proper amount of experience required to be a great Congressman.

               In class, I felt that people were very critical towards Eric Cantor. I know that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but I feel people were just making judgments base on the fact that he has campaign money and Congressional power. I think with any election, people just make their decisions based on the television commercials and who has the best argument. If people were to actually get to know the candidates themselves, I think they would be very surprised at how they really are. I know Eric Cantor personally and know for a fact how honest, kind, and humble of a person he is. Yes he does have a secret service agent that walks around with him, but he still acts like a normal person. I feel that if the class actually got to know him like I do, they would not be so judging.
               On my way to swim practice this afternoon I saw something that was very relevant to this class. I was driving by a huge Eric Cantor sign and saw Floyd Bayne himself putting up 4 small signs for himself around Eric's sign. It reittereated the point that he most likely bit off more than he could chew and is in a little over his head in this camapign. It also shows how unprepared Floyd is and how he is lacking crucial resources.

               After having talked so much about politics, I just want to talk about the issue of free speech that was brought up in The Divided State.  I totally support the fact that everyone has the right to speak, but I do disagree with the fact that the school was paying $40,000 for Michael Moore to come and speak. If he was coming fro free, I would totally be alright with it, but I feel that Moore was being greedy on his own part by asking for so much money from a school.

III. 
               After talking about politics for the majority of the week, I am really interested as to how the elections are going. Who is in the lead in the election polls for the 7th Congressional District? How much ground have the candidates made so far? Who is precieved to win?

Please stay tuned for the answer next week!

Sources

Congressional district 7. (2010, October 24). Retrieved from http://wrhammons.com

Eric cantor. (2010, October 24). Retrieved from http://thedailyinquirer.net

Floyd bayne. (2010, October 24). Retrieved from http://www.floydbayne.com/

Lebanon hostage crisis. (2010, October 24). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanon_hostage_crisis#cite_note-Galenet_Biography_Resource_Center-19

Lebanon hostage crisis. (2010, October 24). Retrieved from http://www.mongabay.com/history/lebanon/lebanon-the_hostage_crisis.html

Lebanon hostage crisis. (2010, October 24). Retrieved from http://fixtheworld.us 

Politics, Politics, Politics

Journal 1-5

I. 
               Last week I was curious as to how Oliver North, who was involved in one of the most controversial government events of all time, was able to win the Republican nomination for the Senate. How did he make it so far if he was surrounded by the dark shadows of his past? After much research, the answer has been found.
               According to "The 20th Century", by David Wallechinsky, Oliver North displayed himself as an antiestablishment politician and drew a lot of support from conservative groups. He gained a lot of popularity, but many key Republicans refused to support him because of the past. Despite this fact, he still had enough popularity among the people and some other conservatives to earn the Republican nomination for the Senate.

 II.    
               Last week in class,  we talked and discussed several different interesting topics. We learned about different styles of political propaganda, such as Word Games, False Connections, Special Appeals, and Logical Fallacies, and we found examples of their use. Also we watched the rest of The Perfect Candidate and discussed several points about the movie. All in all, it was a very interesting and informative week!
               When reading about the different styles of political propaganda, I actually recognized many of them. I had seen a lot of them before in election seasons, but did not know what they were called nor their formal names. Out of the 8 specific styles, I have probably seen "Name Calling" the most often. It is a tactic that politicians use a lot to make their opponents look horrible! It can always be seen on the numerous campaign commercials on the television! I personally think that this style is wrong. I don't think elections should be a time for name calling, but rather a time to find the best candidate for the people. Personally I feel that it is very childish and reminds me of something that a Kindergartner would do! Nothing is ever solved by making someone else look bad!
                After doing research and watching The Perfect Candidate, I have learned more than I ever thought I would know about Oliver North. If I was able to have voted, I am not sure if I would have voted for him or not. Without doing research , I can see how easily people can be persuaded to vote against him. He had a lot of influential politicians totally against him, but he still somehow managed to get 43% of the votes. I feel if people would have actually learned more about the Iran -Contra Scandal, more people may have voted for him. I applaud the fact Oliver North's courage to try to rebuild his life after such a disaster in the past, but I think the U.S. Senate might have been to big of a jump too soon.

               We did not really have a chance to discuss our personal opinions about Oliver North, so I will do that now. I think that he is an okay person who was just seriously misunderstood. Yes, maybe some of his decisions were not spot on, but he was just doing what he thought was best. If I was a hostage being held in Iran, I would have wanted Oliver North to get me out of there by any means necessary! I don't think people understand what horrible things the hostages had to go through! If they were in their position, they would want to be rescued too!

III. 
               After learning about Oliver North and the Iran-Contra Scandal, I am very curious about the hostages that were captured in Iran. I know that they went through a ton of horrible things, but how exactly were their living conditions? What did they have to endure?

Please stay tuned for the answer next week!

Sources: 

Iran. (2010, October 17). Retrieved from http://mideastweb.org 


Oliver north. (2010, October 17). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_North#Politics

Oliver north. (2010, October 17). Retrieved from http://2conservativewomen.blogspot.com

The united states senate. (2010, October 17). Retrieved from http://treehugger.com 

Wallechinsky, David. (2010, October 17). The iran-contra scandal. Retrieved from http://www.dreamscape.com/morgana/reagan.htm

Less of Moore

Journal 1-4


I. 
               Last week I was curious about the critical response to Michael Moore Hates America. I found out that it actually wasn't a very popular movie and not many people actually reviewed it. It didn't receive any outstanding awards like Bolwing for Columbine did, but it did receive an average rating of 6.2 out of 10.  After seeing the title, many viewers thought the movie was going to be in a completely angry tone and were really surprised when it wasn't. One critic even commented that the movie was "just an honest attempt of a young film maker to examine Moore's controversial methods and to question his politics." All in all, the people who saw the movie responded a bit better to it than Michael Moore's movies , but it did not make a huge award-worthy impact.

II. 
               This week was the end of one chapter and the beginning of another. We finished up our unit on Michael Moore Hates America and began our unit on The Perfect Candidate.  We discussed our final thoughts on our "Moore Related Series" of videos, and we also briefly covered the background information in our next unit.

               One topic thst raised a lot of disscussion in class is whether or not it was possible to make a 100% truthful documentary. Everyone had mixed views on this subject. I can not think of a single documentary that has been, in my opinion, completley truthful. I feel that editing can be a form of lying; it leaves out certain parts of conversations, so the audience can not see the full truth of the situation. Film makers always edit out the parts they feel would not support their topic in order to save time. This is true in a documentary too. If they never edited, movies would be months long! I know that this is very unreasonable, but I feel it is the only way to make a completley true documentary. It would litterally show everything that happened so that audiences could see the true story. Since no film maker in their right mind would ever make a movie that was months long, I feel that it is impossible to to make a documentary without lying.

         One really interesting quote that we covered in class this week was said by Penn Jillette. He said, "Fearing that I'd become my enemy in the instant that I preach.." This quote really made me think. He was trying to say that he wants to get his point out, but he doesn't want to do it by stooping to his enemy's level to do so. If he sinks to his level, then he is just as bad as his enemy. This makes me wonder how many times I have actually become my enemy when I was trying to prove my point. Now that I really sit down to think about it, I totally agree with Mr. Jillette. I do feel that you shouldn't turn into the person who is doing you wrong in order to make them look bad. Two wrongs do not make a right, and sometimes it is better to be the bigger person and just let things go.
               My final thoughts on this film are kind of mixed. I do think that his film was much better than Michael Moore's, but I do disagree with some parts of it. I felt he sort of became Michael Moore (his enemy) when he was trying to disprove him. He used several of the same techniques and styles but just in a different point of view. I do think that seeing  both Bowling for Columbine and  Michael Moore Hates America was very benificial in showing two different poits of view and how persuasive the media can be.

               Towards the very end of the week, we started to cover The Perfect Candidate. I find it very interesting and fascinating that the movie takes place in Virginia. I feel that this is extremely beneficial to our class in particular because I feel that it makes it much more relatable. In some of the backgroungd information, we learned that Oliver North was involved in a lot of legal issues and national problems, but still managed to attain the Republican nomination for the Senate seat. He lost in the long run, but I am amazed that he actually made it as far as he did! I would think that all of the controversy surrounding him would have prohibited him from making it anywhere close to where he did! I feel that nowadays, he wouldn't have! I know that I am not an expert in this subject, and I do hope that I will learn more over the next week or two as we watch this documentary!

III.
               As we are beginning our next topic, I am really curious about Mr. Oliver North. I would like to know a little bit more as to why he was chosen for the Republican nominee for the Senate? If there was so much controversy surrounding him, how did he make it as far as he did?

Please stay tuned for the answer next week!

Sources:

Michael moore hates america. (2010, October 10). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Moore_Hates_America

Michael moore hates america (2004). (2010, October 10). Retrieved from http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1183735-1183735-michael_moore_hates_america/?critic=creamcrop#contentReviews

Penn jillette. (2010, October 10). Retrieved from http://downshoredrift.com
The perfect candidate (1996). (2010, October 10). Retrieved from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117320/

Truth. (2010, October 10). Retrieved from http://informedvote.ca

Michael Wilson Loves America?

Journal 1-3


I. 
               Last week I had wondered about the suspicious statistics in the movie Bowling for Columbine. After much research, I have found out that the statistics are mostly false. The United States does have the highest gun ownership in the world. The US has 270 million of the 650 million civilian-owned firearms worldwide. This number can be a bit misleading because "it is not 9 people that have one gun, it is one person that has lots of guns." Also even though Americans have a lot of guns, they actually do not have the highest gun related homicide death rate in the world. In the US per 100,000, there are 6.24 gun related homicides. This may seem like a large number but Brazil had 25.78, Jamaica had 18.23, and South Africa had 26. 63. 6.24 doesn't seem like such a bug number now does it?

II.

               This past week in class we have been covering the movie Michael Moore Hates America by Michael Wilson. This is a movie that is almost as equally controversial as Bowling for Columbine. In the movie, Michael Wilson is trying to prove that Michael Moore is full of lies, deception, and doesn't deserve all of the credit people are giving him.

               One topic that Moore always focuses on is the fact he is from the small and unfortunate town of Flint, Michigan. He does this to "prove" to people that he is just your "average joe" from a small town. He portrays Flint as a decrepit town that is litterally falling apart. This is a terribly one sided view of Flint. In Wilson's movie, he actually goes to Flint and shows the viewers a completley different city. Yes some parts are pretty bad, but a lot of it is nice communities and houses. Wilson also finds out Moore's real hometown is actually Davison, Michigan, not Flint. Davison is just your ordinary American town, very similar to parts of Virginia. It is only located about 10 miles away from Flint! Moore probably used the town of Flint as his hometown instead of Davison because Flint is in a little worse of shape, but still isn't the worst town I have seen.
               One issue that has raised a ton of arguments and discussion in class was the fact that Michael Wilson used a lot of the same filming and editing styles as Michael Moore. Both of the stars and directors use questionable editing styles to prove a point with the specific footage they show. They both go into interviews trying to get certain words or information on tape. The only difference is that Michael Wilson sort of has a guilty conscience about doing this thing this. He even admits to his wrongdoings on camera to the viewers.  Michale Moore just uses it and never second gueses himself, while Wilson does. He even felt bad enough to write a person whom he had interviewed in Moore's hometown to appologize and ask permission to use the footage. I do applaude this notion, and I am very glad that he is at least trying to correct some of his wrongs. This makes me feel like I can trust him a little bit more the Moore.

               Just because Wilson tries to repent his wrongdoings, does that mean that what he is doing is right? I feel the answer is "no". I am happy that he does at least tell us about his mistakes, but it does not make them right. If someone was to hurt someone else and they say that they are sorry, it does not make the action they did correct. It is still worng and forever will be. Along the lines of this, in the movie, an interviewee stated that  it was impossible to make an unbiased documentary, and that all documentaries have to use choppy editing to prove their point. I sort of agree with this statment only because I have never seen an unbiased documentary before. This does not mean that one does not exist, but as of right now, I do not know about the existance of one.


III.
               After watching parts of the movie Michael Moore Hates America, I was very curious about the response to this movie. I know that both this movie and Bowling for Columbine  were very controversial, but I would like to know more about it. Bowling for Columbine received an Academy Award, but what happened to Michael Moore Hates America?

Please stay tunned for the answer next week!

Sources:

Deaths involving firearms, per 100,000 persons, by country (1997). (2007, June 30). Retrieved from http://www.allcountries.org/gun_deaths_by_country.html

Identifying guilt. (2010, October 3). Retrieved from http://www.cindysense.com


International violent death rates. (2003, May 5). Retrieved from http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvintl.html

JT. (2009, July 6). Gun death statistics in other countries. Retrieved from http://bowlingfortruth.com/page/2/
Michael Moore hates America. (2010, October 3). Retrieved from http://www.veiled-chameleon.com

Us highest in gun ownership. (2007, September 12). Retrieved from http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2007/09/12/us_highest_in_gun_ownership.aspx

Bowling for Truth?

Journal 1-2

I.              
               Last week, I was really curious about the outcome of the Ficus Campaigns in Virginia.  I have researched and researched to find the answer to this question, but have unfortunately come up empty handed. The election occurred in the year 2000, and at least 4 ficus plants ran for Congressional seats in Virginia. In the Awful Truth episode, Michael Moore had a lot of trouble getting the ficus to be a candidate. I feel that the plants in Virginia faced the same, if not more problems. On the Virginia State Board of Election's website, the election results do not even show "Ficus" running. This leads me to believe that either the Ficus Campaign fell through, or it didn't even get enough votes to be counted. According to several sources, the Ficus Campaigns did cause a lot of controversy in Virginia and in other states as well. I have not found any information to lead me to believe that any of the campaigns were successful.

II. 
               This week we have continued to explore the world of fallacies, persuasive media, and Michael Moore. We have been watching a movie by Michael Moore called Bowling for Columbine. This is an extremely controversial movie that addresses the Columbine shooting, gun laws, murder, killer bees, and a variety of other terrible things. This movie possess the classical Michael Moore touch, and it is filled with extraordinary amounts of examples of fallacies, sketchy editing, and persuasive filming.

               The main topic of this movie is centered around the Columbine shootings. This is a very fragile topic that still saddens many people years after it happened. Two 12th grade students, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, opened fire on the students at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado on April 20th, 1999. They killed 12 students and 1 teacher, as well as injuring 21 others. Many people believe that violent games and movies, Marylin Manson's music, and the easy access to guns are to blame. In this movie, Michael Moore tries to point the blame at each of these and uses sneaky editing to prove his point.
               After the Colombine Massacre, gun control laws became a big issue. Michael Moore showed the viewers how "easy" it was to attain a gun. He got one from a bank by opening a bank account and bought ammunition "easily" at Walmart. He used his editing "skills" to cut out most of the background checks and extra precautions involved with owning a gun. He did this to mock and make fun of the laws. The NRA was also brought into the picture,and it was shown in a very negative light. He even edited the film of two different speeches together to make Charelton Heston  and the NRA look really bad. Moore used many different fallacies to use the NRA as an excuse for the shootings at Columbine.

               Also Moore addresses the music of Marylin Manson to see if he is the reason for the shootings. He interviewed Mason, who I thought had a very interesting appearance. From a first glance, one would think that Manson has trouble written across his forehead, but once you listen to him talk, you realize that he is actually a very caring person. He said he would have just listened to what the killers had to say and try to talk to them about it afterward.  I was completely shocked after hearing what he had to say! It just goes to show that you can't judge a book by it's cover!

 

               One more thing that was addressed was the topic of violence in America causing murder. According to Moore's statistics, the US has the highest murder rate in the world, when actually we do not. He leaves out certain details so that things appear in a different way. Also, apparently all Americans believe that Canadians are very peaceful people. Moore exploits this so called fact by actually going to Canada and interviewing people to show how similar their cultural influences are to ours. They watch the same movies and play the same violent games. Also according to Mr. Moore, all Canadians own several guns and never lock their doors at night. He showed this by interviewing people at a gun firing range, talking to people in a bar, and walking up to random people's houses. He once again edited out the parts that would disprove his point. As one can see, Mr. Michael Moore is becoming less and less of a credible source of information. 

               Michael Moore's videos always stir up some intense debate in the class. His work stirs up people's emotions, whether or not it is in a good way or a bad way is still to be decided. I honestly wonder how many people have been decived by his work? Also I wonder if I would have been fooled if certain things weren't pointed out to me in class? I wish I could say that the answer would be "no", but honestly I am not sure.

III. 

               After watching parts of Bowling for Columbine , I am very curious about the gun ownership  statistics in the US, Candada, and other major countries of the world. I wonder which country actually has the largest number of guns and whether or not it is related to the murder statistics? 

Please stay tunned for the answer next week!

Sources:

Arnold, L. (2000, June 1). "ficus for congress" takes root in 24 congressional campaigns. Retrieved from http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/060100-02.htm

Bowling for columbine. (2010, September 24). Retrieved from http://www.cinemagora.co.uk/images/films/29/28729-b-bowling-for-columbine.jpg&img
 
Gop congressional primaries-election results. (2000, June 13). Retrieved from http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/ElectionResults/2000/June/default.html

Lopsided congessional races.(2000, November 11). Retrieved from http://archive.fairvote.org/op_eds/cong2000.htm

Marilyn manson. (2010, September 24). Retrieved from http://www.sodahead.com/entertainment/this-week-on-lady-death-presents/blog-76575/?link=ibaf&imgurl=http://pub.tv2.no/multimedia/na/archive/00179/Marilyn_Manson__179474m.jpg&q=marilyn%2Bmanson

Meet morton-the ficus of the week. (2010, September 24). Retrieved from http://www.theficus.com/

National rifle association. (2010, September 24). Retrieved from http://couponkatie.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/nra_logo.jpg&img

And so the Ethical Journey Begins!

Journal 1-1

I.           Since this is the beginning of my Ethic's Blog, I unfortunately do not have a question from last week to answer nor summarize.

II.          Last week was my first full week in Ethic's Class, and I have been loving it so far. Last year I would always ask people what they learned in that class, and they would simply reply : "Ethical Stuff." Of course this gave me no real sense of what went on, but after this week, I feel like I am starting to get the concept of it. I have really enjoyed having this class as my 1st Period, and I hope that the year continues to be this great!
              This week we discussed Loaded Language, Fallacies, Power Words, and their use in society. I knew briefly about  some of these things before we really studied them, but I never really knew how much use they have in modern day society! After searching for them in current news articles and ads, I realized how easy it was to be persuaded or fooled by them. I truly wonder how many times I have fallen for some of these writing techniques!
               In class we also watched two related episodes of The Awful Truth with Michael Moore.

               This is a controversial show that stars Michael Moore, an average "Joe Six-Pack", as he goes around the United States showing Americans "what the government is really like". After watching the first couple of minutes of an episode, you can tell that he is a very strong Democrat. He uses suspicious editing, ambush interviews, and several fallacies and loaded language to make the government look bad, especially Republicans. This series is an excellent example of how loaded language is used in our society. In one of the episodes, Moore tried to get Republican Presidential Candidates to jump into his mobile mosh pit. He always caught the candidates off guard, so their answers never came out quite the way they would have wanted them to. He also used editing to make their responses look even more bad. One candidate actually agreed to do it, but it totally backfired on him in his campaign.

               In another episode, Michael Moore tried to have a Ficus plant run in a Congressional Election. In the episode, he tired to find all of the loop-holes in hour government to justify this plant running for office against an "unopposed candidate". One major fact that Mr. Moore skimmed over was the fact that it was just a Primary Election for the Republican candidate to run in the November Election! Mr. Moore made a big stink over anything that didn't go his way, and he edited the film to make these things seem more drastic. This episode brought up a ton of debate in class that day!
                I sort of understand his point, but I don't think that I would go to the extreme that he did. I agree that a little healthy competition is good for an election, but running against a Ficus is just insane! If it really won, how would it preform it's Congressional Duties? Also I wonder how many people actually knew that it was a plant running for office, and not a person. On campaign posters, they only put the last name of the candidate. If someone saw the name Ficus on a sign, they may assume that is is Mr. ______ Ficus. (ex: Mr. John Ficus) He could really be misleading hundreds of people!

III. 
               In class this week, after watching the Awful Truth  episodes, we learned that at least four "Ficus Candidates" ran in the state of Virginia. Since this occurred during the 2000 election, I do not remember anything about  it coming up in the news. I wonder how the "Ficus Campaigns" went in Virginia and what controversy the caused? Also, I wonder if any of them actually won?

Please stay tuned for the answer next week!


Sources: 
(2010, September 19). Retrieved from http://xprezz.dk

Lankford, R. (2010, September 19). The Awful Truth - Michael Moore. Retrieved from http://www.documentaryfilms.net/Reviews/AwfulTruth/