A Critique on Gregg Levine’s "Our National Nightmare is over…”

Blog Stage Four: Substantial commentary or criticism #2 (POST TO BE GRADED)
A Critique on Gregg Levine’s "Our National Nightmare is over…” by Derek Rider
Friday, March 26th, 2010
Yesterday evening, Gregg Levine over at Fire Dog Lake posted a new editorial about the amended reconciliation bill passed only a few hours before.
He successfully lays out the facts in an easy to read fashion, which is important for those who have not been following the health care situation very closely, to grasp what is going on. It is important to note that everything is structured in a way, that topics stay clear and concise, and there are no paragraphs just rambling, apart from his goofy introduction. His choice of an image of Nancy Pelosi preparing to strike her hammer, with a determined face adds strength of the editorial and adds serves as a great visual aid in portraying his message.
I also think that it’s worth noting how Levine mentioned the educational system in his last paragraph.“Meanwhile, and with all the “excitement” I almost forgot, it should be noted that this reconciliation bill does contain a progressive victory. . . one that would not have likely happened without the efforts of many in this community.” Again he brings in a sarcastic tone, but of the similar articles I saw while browsing, this is the only where that mentioned this educational portion of the bill. Maybe several other editors forgot about it as well…
While Mr. Levine does crack a few jokes, and manages to slide in a sarcastic tone, it’s in good taste, and makes the reading more lighthearted, and allows the tension to be dropped. This is most notable in the comments section located below the article.
I was unable to track the extent Mr. Levine’s history with FDL, but going through his archive, I found dozens of articles with the number of comments close to or exceeding 100, most of which were very positive and constructive, and it’s easy to see that he has quite a fanbase adding to his credibility.
Thank you for the article Mr. Levine, well made.

A Critique on Sunil Sharan's "The green jobs myth"

Blog Stage Three: Substantial commentary or criticism #1 (POST TO BE GRADED)

A Critique on Sunil Sharan's "The green jobs myth" by Derek Rider
Friday, Febraury 26th, 2010

Sunil Sharan released a new editorial (NOTE: The Washington post requires an user registration to view this article, more information at the bottom of my post.) today concerning what he calls “the myth of green jobs”, and just as he is, I am left in the middle of road, unsure which side to fight for.
One part of the editorial that stood out most for me, was in the presentation, it is very easy to see that this article is intended to spark constructive thinking in not only those in favor of going green, but also those against it. It supplies both sides with some excellent ammo for striking up arguments. Sharan himself, being a director of the Smart Grid Initiative at GE from 2008 to 2009, show’s that he has a lot of credibility, and his editorial shows that he is actively trying to figure out exactly how to tackle this idea of going green considering his line of work. Sharan presents a very well formulated argument, and does an excellent job of not biasing, which I applaud him for. Sharan claims that while it is good for our nation to start moving toward a green style of living, especially since it will create current jobs, at the same time, in the future, with the automation of going green many will also lose their jobs. Sharan has taken the time out to give mathematical statistics showing exactly what kind of a temporary change going green could make for our country, and equally so, labels out exactly what could happen once “our installation process” has completed.
I feel the balance of power is best described in his conclusion paragraph; “For the purpose of creating jobs, then, a "clean-energy economy" will not offer a panacea. This does not necessarily mean that America should not become green to alleviate climate change, to kick its addiction to foreign oil or to use energy sources more efficiently. But those who take great pains to tout the "job-creation potential" of the green space might just end up inducing labor pains all around.”
Sharan successfully addresses the pros and cons of both situations, and in a matter that leaves both sides at a balance, leaving this topic wide open for discussion.
A very well made editorial Mr. Sharan, I will be looking forward to more of them.



Note continued:
Again, I apologize that the Washington Post requires that you register an account to view this article, I'm sure they will not spam you or anything. Also, I think it would be a wise choice to go ahead and register now, seeing as The Washington Post is a recommended source for our U.S. Government class, and registering now will probably make life easier for you later in the semester.

~75% of Americans support gays in the military.

Stage Two: Article Introduction (Post to be graded.)

Today, a new article (NOTE: The Washington post requires an user registration to view this article, more information at the bottom of my post.) went up at The Washington Post stating that three-quarters of Americans said that they support openly gay people serving in the U.S. Military. The article, written by Ed O’Keefe and Jennifer Agiesta, stresses the fact that this majority says we should remove the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy instilled during the Clinton administration back in 1993, which forbids commanders to ask the sexual orientation of a service member and REQUIRES the discharge of openly gay men and women.

President Obama called for a repeal of the policy during his State of the Union Address last month, as well as the military’s top civilian and leadership expressing personal support for a repeal. Three officials, Robert M. Gates, Carter F. Ham and Jeh C. Johnson are in the midst of conducting studies and are trying to work out the complicated parts of the repeal.

The statistics were formulated by random telephone calls to 1004 adult Americans, both male and female, on both home and cellphone numbers. Men and seniors were about 15% less likely to agree with the repeal, than that of women, and young adults.

This article is significant because it helps to demonstrate just how dramatically our attitudes towards homosexuals has changed in the past 17 years. No matter which side of the fence your on, I recommend checking out the article yourself.

Again, I apologize that the Washington Post requires that you register an account to view this article, I'm sure they will not spam you or anything. Also, I think it would be a wise choice to go ahead and register now, seeing as The Washington Post is a recommended source for our U.S. Government class, and registering now will probably make life easier for you later in the semester.

Gettin' to know me a bit, check out these bad marks.

Since we'll all be traveling on this adventure together, with me as your guide, how about you get to know me a bit.

According to the Typology test at People Press I fall into the category of a Liberal, though just as the website proclaims, that doesn't necessarily mean I follow all of their beliefs.

Having absolutely no political experience, hell, I wasn't really even sure what typological group I belong in, I don't necessarily follow what everyone believes, but I follow what I believe to be right and just.

I am only taking Government 2305 because the state of Texas mandates that I have 6 credit hours of either Texas or United States Government, but since I'm enrolled in the class, why not learn what I can about not only our government, but what I feel about it, as well as what I'd like to do to improve it.

Coming in with really no goals in the class, other than a nice passing grade, I would say that now I would like to learn about myself, what exactly it is that I believe in/stand for and what role I serve here in our country as an individual.

I correctly answered 23 out of 33 questions on the civics quiz I took at American Civil Literacy
Unfortunately this only scored me at 69.70%, when the average score was 73.5%. Also, incredibly I correctly answered only 2 of the 12 questions on the Pew Research current events quiz at Pew Research.

So you can tell that I definitely could some improving in the Government department.

In that case I will see you all next time.
-Derek Rider

I don't even know who I am, but I'm willing to get to know me.

Being now a young man in our country, it is definitely time that I start to form up my political views, instead of staying undecided about everything.

Yesterday I registered to vote for our state election here in Texas, I have very little knowledge about my own government here at home, but with this new responsibility that I have, it is my duty to learn all that I can about the candidates so that I will be able to make the decision that is best for me. About another month or so and my paperwork should be arriving in the mail.

This will be a rather dramatic change for me, since I've never really followed politics in our current generation, which is ironic because it's the one that matters most in my life. In the past few years, going over the history of the United States in my classes, I've become more and more interested about our government, but when it actually came to a government class in high school, I couldn't have cared less about the actual content, I was just in it for the passing grade.

Now in Professor Chris Seago's US Government 2305, I'll have to make the best of this time frame, in order to learn what I can about our Government, and see where I actually stand.

As much as I used to feel that one voters opinion didn't matter, within the past 4 to 5 years, now that I have matured more, I have really seen what a difference one vote can make.

Until next time, Derek Rider.