Well-Chosen Words

I found this post by fellow classmate, Caitlin, to be well-structured in its argument against a national government that is growing ever stronger. Her rhetoric is so compelling, mainly due to the hyperbolic language she utilizes—creating a sense of urgency and doom. Her portrayal of the national government as a malevolent institution proficiently uses exaggeration as a tool which shapes her convincing argument. The specific word choices that she makes, from the government “worm[ing] its way into every system” to “want[ing] to be [our] nanny state,” portrays our government in such a negative light, we cannot help to begin to doubt its intentions.

Caitlin makes several valid points:
1) The government displays condescension in its attempts to gain control of various systems, from healthcare to industry.
2) Do we wish to be so dependent on our government?
3) The government serves its purpose by protecting our rights and nothing more.
4) Why should we be forced to pay for causes we do not support?

Her conservative views towards government interference are evident from the very beginning of this strong-minded blog post. However, her writing is not merely opinionated. She manages to provide effective evidence in order to support her adamant beliefs by answering the question, “so what?” So what if the government is becoming stronger? Caitlin provides an unappealing scenario in which we become ultimately dependent on our federal government. She calls upon the indignance of most Americans who do not particularly enjoy the feeling of relying on others. She portrays the government as thieves of our money, effectively igniting resentment in her readers. Lastly, she quotes one our wise Founding Father, Thomas Jefferson, who completely supports her view of a government that lets its people be. All in all, a cogent and convincing argument.

Equality Needed

I have to admit, I was quite hesitant to provide a commentary on same-sex marriage. Frankly, I believe it is probably one of the most controversial topics in existence today. It is truly doubtful that we will ever reach a solution that pleases everyone. Chances are, what I have to say will offend someone, simply because same-sex marriage is such a touchy subject. Numerous legislative battles, lawsuits, and ballot initiatives have ensued as a result of the strong opinions most Americans hold towards this issue.


Honestly, I am completely for same-sex marriage. Before I delve further in explaining my opinion, I would first like to analyze the reasoning behind both sides of this never-ending battle. Viewpoints against same-sex marriage are often based on religious principles, which I am in no place to undermine. While I understand and respect religious views that consider same-sex marriage a sin, as an atheist, I look at this from a personal viewpoint. Homosexuals are just as human as the rest of us. They have favorite colors. They have good days. They have bad ones. Really, the only thing that makes them different is their sexual orientation. How can anyone truly justify this as a legitimate basis on which to deny rights? What happened to true equality? Who has the right to make exceptions to fairness, to choose to grant rights to some but not all Americans? Creating criteria for equality undermines what makes America free. As our government book mentioned, those who are acquainted with gays or lesbians tend to be more sympathetic. Perhaps this is true. I happen to know several and merely wish them the best. If they desire to get married, to receive the same legal status granted to heterosexual couples, what should stop them?


As this editorial from the New York Times explains, the concept of marriage between a man and a woman becomes increasingly idolized in terms of raising children. Worldwide, as times change, less importance is placed on a nuclear family. Just because a union occurs between a man and a man or a woman and a woman does not make them any less capable of caring for children. The assertion that kids need a mother or father figure is simply blatantly stereotypical. What is a mother figure? What is a father figure? To assume that all parents fall under either of those two categories proves utter ignorance. Families rely on tender, loving care, regardless of the gender of one's parents.


All in all, same-sex marriage is something that should be legal nationwide, however long it will take for this to happen. First things first, it is essential for people to recognize gays and homosexuals as equals. Humans, just like you and me.

Kudos to a Fellow Classmate

Upon first inspection of More Corruption Swept Under the Rug, which criticizes the behavior of prominent government officials, I was already blown away by its length alone. But after careful analysis, I came to realize that Dann’s post achieved not only quantity but also, more importantly, quality. He brings to our attention an issue that I concordantly lament that many Americans overlook—the lack of response to political corruption. The scorn and contempt he displays is evident through his primary example of the House Ethics Committee’s reaction to Congressman Charlie Rangel’s tax violations. He expresses his disdain of the committee’s decision to punish Rangel with a reprimand by providing a series of useful comparisons. Dann enhances the credibility of his argument by revealing the absurdity of simply reprimanding Rangel. He does so by listing the instances in which the House has chosen to use reprimands. He further insults the House by pointing out other cases when it failed to pursue effective punishments. This provides a segway into Dann’s second point: that Congressmen use of the technique of bashing their opponents is underhanded and foul. He supports this argument by highlighting the hypocrisy of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi in promising that she would “drain the swamp” and preside over “the most ethical Congress in history” while subsequently “going easy” on Charlie Rangel.

Dann’s effective use of evidence, his intensely critical tone, and his flawless logic comprise an incredibly convincing post criticizing corruption and hypocrisy. He manages to persuade all readers to agree that not only are such maladies occuring, but they have also become so commonplace that Americans are no longer shocked. He ignites an indignance that will hopefully lead to action and protest.