Governor Brown For One More Round

According to the New York Times, Governor Brown is seeking yet another term as Governor of California.  If elected, this will be the fourth term that Brown serves, as he first took office nearly 40 years ago. While the article does mention Brown’s two opponents, Neel Kashkari and Tim Donnelly, the mention of the two men is is only done so in passing, by simply stating their names and titles.

This article can be related to our reading on “How News Media Shape Political Campaigns.  The reading states that the news gives us Information, which in some cases can be edited, and we use that information to make decisions on things.  After reading this article, and not having much information on the Governor to begin with, I am left with positive feels about him, since the article mainly states positive things, such as the fact that he has brought the state from deficit to surplus, as well as that his approval ratings are at an all-time high.  The article also incorporates quotes from the Governor.  These quotes help build his image as a strong leader. Being that this is one of the only articles that I have read on the Governor, I admit that I am very much uninformed on his politics.  That said, my encounter with this article serves as the perfect example of how news media can shape political campaigns.  Although I would never let one article define my perception of a politician, there are many people out there who would.  In such cases, the shaping of political campaigns begin.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/28/us/brown-to-run-for-re-election-as-california-governor.html

Foreign Aid, who should receive?

According to the New York Times, the Ukrain is in desperate need on "billions of dollars" (1). That without this money immediately the country is bound to fall very badly. The government will be forced to make changes on the foreign aid is administered which would include, "government cutbacks, higher energy costs and structural changes" (1) that has not been previously accepted by the Ukrainian government. The United States is already in progress of planning to send immediate aid to the country in hopes that it will make the necessary changes. However, the worry is presumed by many that the country will use the money to have an alternate agenda and ultimately face turmoil upon not being able to deliver what is requested.

This article related to the "Comparing the Foreign Aid Policies of President Bush and Obama." The article did state that once the aid is administered that the follow through cannot be established by the United States, instead the money is now in the hands of the country in need and sometimes is used to put the country into more turmoil. I also do not think the Ukraine has the intentions that were laid out in the guidelines to seek the aid, however since they are in a very serious crisis, the United States will take the responsibility and assist them with a ton of money and very heavy aid package. I stated in class that whose priority is it to assist what country? It really shows that the Ukraine has some stake that the United States values while other countries that face similar crisis and do not get the aid, are not necessarily as valued according the U.S. perspective.  Also the N.Y. Times article did not speak about the individual human rights of the Ukrainians, and that was a criticism our class article had on how foreign aid did not necessarily recognize human rights. There is a massive human rights violation occurring in the Ukraine and attention needs to be on that first.  

Hope and Expectation as Presidential Rhetoric

On or about February 4, 2014 President Obama was quoted as saying during a nationally broadcast address, "We may disagree about gay marriage, but surely we can agree that it is unconscionable to target gays and lesbians for who they are -- whether it's here in the United States or ... more extremely in odious laws that are being proposed most recently in Uganda". Statements attributed to Secretaries of State Hillary Clinton and John Kerry have also spotlighted the United States liberal stance on gay rights and the extreme anti-gay law, now recently approved, in Uganda. This liberal stance is reflected in the recent veto of an Arizona "gay rights vs Christian rights" law by the governor of said state and the growing trend toward adoption of many pro gay rights legislations in several other states.

Although this issue deserves more attention than I could muster here I will simply relate the afore mentioned remark by President Obama to the class reading entitled "The Contextual Presidency: The Negative Shift in Presidential Immigration Rhetoric" by Damien Arthur and Joshua Woods. This article specifically addresses the issue of immigration rhetoric but also speaks of how presidents use their rhetoric to bring about desired, but as yet unrealized, results. In the opening paragraph of Arthur and Woods' article they write, "The rhetoric is supposed to bring about a desired result...presidents “go public” with their requests with the hope that it will translate into policies". President Obama's remark deftly sidesteps the issue of state's rights concerning marriage and instead focuses on human rights in hopes, I surmise, to influence foreign and domestic policy.

This issue has sparked debates concerning tolerance, state's rights, human rights, legal precedent, and more. One of the more interesting sources I reviewed spoke of the United States as being founded on the principle of a morality of rights rather than a morality of ends as per the following excerpt; "Writing in the wake of Europe's religious civil wars, the liberal thinkers who most influenced the American constitutional framers (John Locke and Montesquieu) treated disagreement about ultimate ends as the normal condition of social life, and then sought to find common moral ground shared by every faction within society, regardless of the ends they pursued. That common ground turned out to be a belief in individual dignity and rights to life and liberty that flow from it" (Linker, Damon. How conservatives lost the culture war. The Week.com)

For those that enjoy a dramatization of some of the issues I offer the following link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYaewOBGybw

For those that prefer stark reality:
http://www.towleroad.com/2014/02/here-is-the-text-of-ugandas-anti-homosexuality-law-read-it.html

J.J. Blog

After reading Jamieson's piece on how well President Obama used persuasion leading to and during his election and presidency,u thoughts shifters to Hilary Clinton and her current methods. It is very clear Hillary Clinton is using the influence of former President, Bill Clinton, her husband, to persuade his followers into supporting her. Although this seemed to be a good strategy, the release of doodles from the former president's records seem to face a negative effect on Hillary. Although the doodles are from the former president's speech writer, voters seem to be upset at the playfulness of the doodles throughout important issues. This is not helpful to Hilary's attempt to use her husband!s former success, because now many Americans are upset with his administration. 

http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/02/20/obamas-deafening-silence-on-venezuela-n1797949

Katie Pavlich critics Obama for his silence on the Venezuela. She makes the argument that because the Venezuelan regime is far left, Obama hasn't spoke out even when 3 American Diplomats were expelled. All the White House has stated is that there is "deep concern" for the issue. She also state how Obamas mentor went to to Venezuela in 2006 to celebrate  "Socialism of the 21st Century,"  and it has been quoted that Hugo Chavez, the prior dictator, would vote for Obama if he was an American. 

Pavlich, is much like Jamieson  in her article "How Well Has President Obama Chosen From the Available Means of Persuasion?" Expect that while Jamieson critiqued Obama's speeches, Pavlich is critiquing his lack there of. Jamieson talks about how sometimes, because of how much time has passed and lack of 'understanding' it maybe better for a president not to make a speech; and with this particular situation, I agree. Obama isn't make a speech because it isn't the right time; many people don't know howVenezuela will play out because it is a hard situation . There is a far left government who no doubt has improved Venezuela but the right isn't happy because of the implants that has happened because of the government. I  think that  by not making a speech and not supporting a side, Obama is doing the right thing,.

Blog Post 4: President Obama said "God's Work"

This week President Obama gave a statement indicating that the Organization for Action (OFA) was doing "God's Work."  Obama was boosting the morale of the volunteers that were pushing citizens to get health insurance for those that do not have insurance with Obamacare before the March 31st deadline.  In his statement Obama was saying not to be discouraged by partisan attacks and that he and his team in Washington can only talk so much, but what really makes a difference are the volunteers' actions.  Obama said "The work you're doing is God's work.  It is hard work." 

I found this article related to Stephen Heidt's article "The Presidency as Pastiche: Atomization, Circulation, and Rhetorical Instability," because President Obama's statement is a pastiche where it somewhat resembles a pastor or priest preaching and by encouraging the volunteers to keep doing what they are doing.  Pastiche means a work of art or literature that imitates a style or character of someone or something else and by celebrating the work, not mocking it.  The ideography for Obama's statement would be "God's work," because just by saying it, it automatically gives the idea of being holy, divine, and ultimately morale and just.  The term "God's work" is a fragment in Obama's address that "...perform specific functions in the service of ideological goals" (Heidt 624) because it reminds the volunteers and the supporters that despite the negative campaigning they are still doing something for a good cause, and that is allowing everyone to get health insurance.  By saying "God's work," President Obama is reminding the supporters, volunteers, and everyone else, even the opposing side, that getting everyone to get health insurance is ultimately good which benefits the greater good of the American people.  In this sense the ideograph "God's work," functioned as a rhetorical text that "...interpellated audiences into a narrative that constituted their identities and didactically animated their political activity" (Heidt 624) because it boosted the people's morale and reminded them that they are doing good works giving the notion that they are saints in the presence of sinners saving their souls, almost literally by forcing them to get health insurance.

Blog 4

This story is about a man by the name of James C. Brown, who was convicted of first degree murder of 10 women. Brown met the women through a website called backpage.com that is geared towards adults. Brown set fire to the bodies and was being invested since 2011.

The court case in my opinion is absolutely ridiculous,being that it shows political cynicism in my opinion because it is frustrating that the man was being investigated for about three years and the police/FBI was allowing for the deaths to happen in a sense. Wears the public put our trust in the law system to protect us as individuals of this nation and our families. However,  how are we as a society to put trust in the system when they allow for investigations to continue for years while innocent people are having their lives taken away.