Pointless Politcian?

While writing my paper about Politicians using Video games to get ahead in their careers, I began to think. What's the point of even being a Politician? You try to appeal to the greatest amout of voters you can to win the election. Thus weakening your own goals and what you personally wanted to accomplish. Then all you try to do in office is make the voters happy so you can get re-elected. You attack what the majority thinks is wrong and support what the majority thinks is right. Most of the country is afraid of big change so nothing that really needs to be done to this country will ever be done. No one really likes you becasue you're a thieving Politicians who just wants to keep your job. what's the point? There's no real power in it, you're just controled by the people who put you there (In theroy) I don't think it's really worth it. Looking at it this way makes me think Politcians are worthless to begin with. They pass laws that don't really affect much, when what we really need to change is obvious.

It seems I'm turning into a bit of Anarchist, no, I don't think that would work either. Once people are free all they want to do is to be put back into order again. I just don't think our current system works the way it should. I think we need to start over. press reset.

Papers

The paper is probaly one of the most hated assignments that a student will ever recieve. There are many different reasons why this is so. One of the foremost is that writing a paper is a challenging task. Personally, I find that the most difficult part to writing a paper is starting it. Since writing papers is not somthing I would do for fun, I will always put it off till the last possible minute. Once the paper is started I usually don't have much trouble finishing it on time, with the sacrifice of a few hours of sleep.

Choices

Thinking of the choice between owning a normal looking turtle with the potential of alosing money and displaying the head of Adolf Hitler while earning money, I came up with some necessary things to look at before making decison. The first thing that comes to mind is the money aspect because all thoughts revolve around the propect of losing money or gaining money. The option of tkaing the turtle will most definantly cost more. This is not only because of the prospect of losing 999 dollars if the turtle dies, but it also costs money to take care of a turtle. You need to feed it take it to the vet if it is sick not to mention the time required to properly care for one. While having Hitler's skull displayed would gain money. The next thing to think about is morality, how would you feel having one of the world's most hated men's skull in your living room? But, how moral is it to take in a living animal if you can not properly care for it? The decison I would make is to take care of the turtle. I chose this not because I think displaying Hitler's skull is immoral, a skull is a skull it's not like Hitler's brain is still inside, also there is no rule saying you must say it is Hitler's skull. I chose the turtle becasue I own two turtles already and I know what needs to be done to take care of them. I really enjoy keeping them as pets. As a loop hole I would just name my new turtle Hitler and explain that it would have the same effect as having his skull because the name is what is important. Thus, earning money and being able to better take care of my turtles.

Images

My in-class writings were both different and similar depending on how they are looked at. They are different because they were spawn from two different images and contained different characters and a different view on things. They were similar because the under lying theme of what I thought from seeing the images was the same. The reason they had differenaces was becasue the stories were taken from two different pictures. They were the same becasue when I looked at the pictures I got almost the same feeling from them and put that idea in both stories.

The images effected my writing by giving me a train of thought to write my stories on. Also, viewing the image of the deer sign first effected my take on the sign with the elderly couple with the cute saying. This is because I viewed the deer sign as saying that deer had been hit by cars according to the number of slash marks. So, I took the later sign as saying taht no elderly couples had been hit yet due to lack of slash marks. Perhaps I sense of humor jsut needs a re-adjusment.

Peer Review

This was my first time working in a peer review. I thought it was actually interesting and for the most part helpful. There are just a few things that could help to make it better. I think that the groups should be limited to 3 people at the most. This is because I found after as I got to the forth paper I had to review I was really uninterested in checking another paper. My thoughts on writing had gone dry so to say. I also think that we sould make sure we talk to the authors about why we thought things in the paper didn't work. Another problem with a large group was there really was no time for that. Another thought is to make sure we fine things that could be fixed, compliments are great but they don't help with fixing a paper and since no paper is perfect there should always be somthing to fix. I think some of these issues will go away the next time because we are now used to the process.

Outlining

I believe that outlining has its usefulness for some people. I, unfortunatly, do not find outlining to be that helpful. To me outlining is too structured to help write a paper properly.

I remember when I was in middel school and the lower part of highschool; we had to turn in an outline along with our papers. This was one of the hardest things for me to do. I felt that I was being restricted by the outline. The first reason I believe this the fact that our schools bored into our heads that we had to outline and had to brain storm because it was the standard writing method.

I know the outline should encompass my ideas of the paper, but while writing ideas can change and alterations from the outline can sometimes screw up the rest of what you have outline forcing you to write the paper without an outline anyway. It is easier for me to write a paper from my head. To be able to change what needs to be changed without feeling bad for drifting from the outlined path I had set up.

Wendy's ad

Flipping through a old copy of entertainment weekly at work I came across an ad for a new group of Sandwiches from Wendy's. The ad shows a picture of a woman in her late thirties about to bite into one of these sandwiches with almost a look of extasy. Then there are the words "Don't do sandwiches with zero grams of taste, Do Wendy's new Frescata Sandwiches" Followed by a discription of what is on the sandwich(which are the same you can find on any sort of sub or deli sandwich) and the sentance "anything less is a 'sub' sandwich."
Looking at this ad it is obvious to see Wendy's wants people to buy their sandwiches, but who exactly are they targeting with this ad? I think the fact that the ad features a middel aged woman and not a young very attractive girl is that Wendy's wants to attract the attention of those middel aged women. Since the woman is rather plain looking they want this age group of women to identify with her. It is possible they want to get the attention of those who are watching what they eat more carefully with the slogan "Don't do sandwiches with zero grams of taste." Wendy's wants this group to think that their sandwiches may not be as healthy as others but they definantly taste better. Another example of this is the line about anythings less being a "sub" sandwich. Which could mean a sub-par sandwich or a substitute sandwich. However, many will make the relationship to submarine sandwiches. So in fact Wendy's is saying again their sandwiches are better then places like Subway.

*Bleep* for censorship

After discussing the reasons people censor themselves, I've come to the conclusion that all the arguments boil down to one point. That point is the fact that we are forced to conform to what society tells us is right and wrong. We censor our thoughts, our actions, our writings for no other reason then the fact that our society may view them as immoral, offensive, or even just different. I realize that the censoring of certain things may be necessary because there are children who and very easily influenced and should not be exposed to certain things at a young age. I do not think that censorship should be taken to the extremes it sometimes has for that reason though. Parents should be responsible for raising their children, not society.
However, there comes a point when things can be censored so much the whole point of what the artist was trying to say will be lost. All we will end up with is page after page of monotony that will not upset anyone but also does not raise any thought what so ever. In the end I think artists censoring themselves will lead to the dilution of our arts.