- Sorry it was late my computer crashed, but my rough draft was saved so i had to get it fixed and the file recovered in order to post it because i didnt want to lose my work and start over.
Mike Tramontelli 3/31/09
AMST 072W Prof. Palmer
Was the Vietnam War Fought in Order to Protect Freedom or Impose it?
Soldiers as well as the American people seemed to be searching for the real reason why the United States of America was fighting Vietnam War. American soldiers came to Vietnam knowing the dangers and possible imminent destruction that they might encounter while fighting in South East Asia. These young men were scared out of their minds when they arrived and hated the experienced so much that some soldiers even keep a mental journal about how many days they had left in Vietnam. In a biographical account of the Vietnam war, If I Die in a Combat Zone, Box me up and Ship me Home written by Tim O’Brien, soldiers kept track of the days that they’d have to be in Vietnam. Many of the brave soldiers who fought in the Vietnam War didn’t choose to travel to Asia to fight for our country; Uncle Sam chose them himself. The Vietnam War was fought in some of the most turbulent years of the Cold War and the United States couldn’t look weak, so the US was forced into the war in order to stop the spread of communism as well as to keep face as a national power on the global scale. The main connection that can be made historically with most of the perennial powerful nations is their plethora of accessible resources. The idea of consumption plays a major role in the Vietnam War because America consumed a great deal of its resources in order to fight in this war. Resources are not limited to natural resources such as coal, potable water, and lumber but people as well. America was a cold-blooded country that would do anything it could in order to keep face. Tim O’Brien wants reader to realize that even though on the outside the government wanted to keep the Vietnam war going in order to quell communism, the factual reality was that the US wanted to keep its omniscient status even though the American citizens themselves had to endure damages that the government would have classified as “expenditures”.
“My real problem is one of conscience and philosophy and intellect and emotion and fear and physical hurt and a desire to live chastened by a desire to be good, and also, underneath, a desire to prove myself a hero, I explained in the broadest terms, what troubled me” (O’Brien 57). Many of the soldiers didn’t even know why they were drafted, fighting the war, or even the underlying reason for America fighting but they still had to fight even though deception and lies, perpetuated by the US government, shrouded their comprehension. It was known that America has been considered the nation that stepped in when others had problems, but the reality of the Vietnam War was that America didn’t know what it was up against. The war was fought on foreign soil, thousands of miles away in a land that very few Americans had even visited, but that didn’t stop the government from having a quarter of its military fight this war (O’Brien). This one fact embodies how America viewed consumption because the USA would let one fourth of its military fight a war that it may not win. The American military was very strong and had an exponential amount more resources, but the reason why the American military was at a tactical disadvantage was the fact the Vietcong knew the terrain. This didn’t stop the American soldiers from pushing on without any regard for the safety of its own people. The US was willing to endure the death of thousands of its soldiers in order to advance its position. Moreover, the US didn’t only consume resources of its military; the United States Army consumed the resources of the people and land of Vietnam.
“With daybreak, Captain Johansen and the artillery lieutenant walked over and found a man with a bullet hole in his head. There were no weapons. The dead man carried a pouch of papers, some rice, tobacco, canned fish, and he wore a blue-green uniform.” (O’Brien 98). The tactics used by the American military had one main goal, kill as many Vietcongs. It didn’t seem to matter that the conventional way of fighting over in Vietnam had total disregard for life. If soldiers died during the war then it is considered fine because it is a war and the same idea carried over for the Vietnamese people. The military would use napalm, airplane bombings, gun barrages, as well as any other explosive device it had in order to quell the Vietcong. However, this meant that many Vietnamese people suffered casualties because of the lack of morality and decency displayed by the American military. In addition, many soldiers stated that they couldn’t tell the soldiers and civilians apart. They wore the same uniforms, lived in similar areas, and since there was no apparent age requirement to be a Vietnamese soldier, the person’s age couldn’t be a deciding factor. Many American soldiers were order to kill on sight even though they didn’t know if the person was a soldier or civilian. Furthermore, the countless foxholes where Vietcongs hid proved to be a massive hindrance on the eradication of the Vietcong and the advancement by the military. The military was scared that if it had advanced too far that the Vietcong hiding in the foxholes could secretly surround many soldiers. So as a result, the commanding officers ordered many late-night ambushes of the foxholes by the infantry. The military sent in the lowest, youngest, and most inexperienced soldiers to figure out whether there were either a series of mines or camouflaged soldiers waiting for them when they came down. Apparently, the lives of the young men in this country seem to be worthless due to the simple fact that the higher ranking official didn’t go underground probing for danger and maybe have to suffer what a less important soldier would. It seems that O’Brien wanted the reader to understand that every military action was well thought out and the potential costs and benefits were examined very carefully.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Paper 3 draft
Mike Tramontelli 3/3/09
AMST 072W Prof. Palmer
“For machineless men generally, it is both necessity and pleasure to assist, and be assisted by one’s neighbor.” (Susman 156) The ideology of the thirties was to lend a helping hand to our fellow Americans in need and provide aid to the soldiers overseas. Susman argues that in countries less developed than the United States, people are more willing to be selfless and extend a metaphorical olive branch to people who less fortunate. Due to the unregulated corporate activity, a series of unfortunate events during twenties lead to the depression of the thirties, but that didn’t stop the American people from uniting as a collectivist society in order to rid the ills of an economic tailspin. Hoover said in closing the Presidential campaign of 1932: “This campaign is more of a contest between two men. It is more of a contest between two parties. It is a contest between two philosophies of government…” (Hoover 1938). Hoover was a proponent of government that took a “hands off” approach while Franklin Delano Roosevelt employed the polar opposite role of government, “hand on” in order to increase efficiency and aid America in its escape of its current economic rut. Susman argues that the new technologies that were invented in the 1930’s—radio, photographs, and better distribution of the print media—allowed Americans, all over the country, to visualize the attitudes of people who were suffering from the economic woes of the era as well. The CCC, a public works programs created by FDR, was thoroughly documented and their photographs. The Wilfred Mead CCC Work Project photo didn’t just depict a valiant looking American male hold a sledge hammer, it portrays the iron will of the American workforce and its steadfastness to support the polices implemented by the New Deal. The harshest economic times America faced was in the 1930’s and in the struggle for economic prosperity, the visual and print media supported FDR’s notion of social welfare liberalism to the laissez-faire liberalism present by Hoover.
“It seems that things are in a rut, fixes, settled, that the world has grown old and tired and very much out of joint. This is the mood of depression, of dire and weary depression.” (FDR 1). Even though a somber mood was shrouding every American, the collectivist ideals, instilled by the New Deal, gave Americans hope and a yearning to get up and work in order to restore our country. Hoover thought that by permitting the corporation to continue on the same path that America would come out unscathed. American citizens liked that under Hoover, they were more free to choose various options and have a sense of individuality without the shroud of government looming over them. But for what were the American people able to choose. Hoover argued that New Deal polices are “substituting personal power and centralized government for the institutions of free men.” (Hoover 3). However, Hoover does fail to realize that the main reason why the country is in an economic recession is the unfair, unreasonable, and extremly corrupt tactics that corporation employed in order to make money. Corporations, which were left unregulated, didn’t afford their workers any suitable benefits for basically slaving away all day. Susman argues that “the shift to a culture of sight and sound was of profound importance; it increased our self awareness as a culture; it helped create a unity of response and action not previously possible.” (Susman 100). The advent of media technology made it almost universal for an American citizen in Utah have access to the same news printed for city dwellers. Increased knowledge of the economic hardships and having the ability to access data regarding the two vastly different schools of liberalism gave the American people a shared set of knowledge in order to make better informed decisions than in the past.
I'm following the pattern that was presented on the assignment sheet.
AMST 072W Prof. Palmer
“For machineless men generally, it is both necessity and pleasure to assist, and be assisted by one’s neighbor.” (Susman 156) The ideology of the thirties was to lend a helping hand to our fellow Americans in need and provide aid to the soldiers overseas. Susman argues that in countries less developed than the United States, people are more willing to be selfless and extend a metaphorical olive branch to people who less fortunate. Due to the unregulated corporate activity, a series of unfortunate events during twenties lead to the depression of the thirties, but that didn’t stop the American people from uniting as a collectivist society in order to rid the ills of an economic tailspin. Hoover said in closing the Presidential campaign of 1932: “This campaign is more of a contest between two men. It is more of a contest between two parties. It is a contest between two philosophies of government…” (Hoover 1938). Hoover was a proponent of government that took a “hands off” approach while Franklin Delano Roosevelt employed the polar opposite role of government, “hand on” in order to increase efficiency and aid America in its escape of its current economic rut. Susman argues that the new technologies that were invented in the 1930’s—radio, photographs, and better distribution of the print media—allowed Americans, all over the country, to visualize the attitudes of people who were suffering from the economic woes of the era as well. The CCC, a public works programs created by FDR, was thoroughly documented and their photographs. The Wilfred Mead CCC Work Project photo didn’t just depict a valiant looking American male hold a sledge hammer, it portrays the iron will of the American workforce and its steadfastness to support the polices implemented by the New Deal. The harshest economic times America faced was in the 1930’s and in the struggle for economic prosperity, the visual and print media supported FDR’s notion of social welfare liberalism to the laissez-faire liberalism present by Hoover.
“It seems that things are in a rut, fixes, settled, that the world has grown old and tired and very much out of joint. This is the mood of depression, of dire and weary depression.” (FDR 1). Even though a somber mood was shrouding every American, the collectivist ideals, instilled by the New Deal, gave Americans hope and a yearning to get up and work in order to restore our country. Hoover thought that by permitting the corporation to continue on the same path that America would come out unscathed. American citizens liked that under Hoover, they were more free to choose various options and have a sense of individuality without the shroud of government looming over them. But for what were the American people able to choose. Hoover argued that New Deal polices are “substituting personal power and centralized government for the institutions of free men.” (Hoover 3). However, Hoover does fail to realize that the main reason why the country is in an economic recession is the unfair, unreasonable, and extremly corrupt tactics that corporation employed in order to make money. Corporations, which were left unregulated, didn’t afford their workers any suitable benefits for basically slaving away all day. Susman argues that “the shift to a culture of sight and sound was of profound importance; it increased our self awareness as a culture; it helped create a unity of response and action not previously possible.” (Susman 100). The advent of media technology made it almost universal for an American citizen in Utah have access to the same news printed for city dwellers. Increased knowledge of the economic hardships and having the ability to access data regarding the two vastly different schools of liberalism gave the American people a shared set of knowledge in order to make better informed decisions than in the past.
I'm following the pattern that was presented on the assignment sheet.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Paper 2. Question 2
Mike Tramontelli 2/11/09
AMST 072W Prof. Palmer
“You can select ten ordinary girls from a factory and by the skillful use of such preparations as Kijja and proper toilet articles…you can in a short time make them as attractive and good-looking as most any ten wealthy society girls…it is not as much a matter of beauty with different classes of girls as it is how they are fixed up.” (Piess 385). Apparently, the manufacturer who created the pamphlet in which this quote was printed thought that it doesn’t matter how poor and ugly one might be; if cosmetics were applied anyone could look beautiful and regal. In Piess’s essay she discussed the emerging consumer markets that were prevalent in American society during the era surrounding the early twentieth century. The “class, mass, and consumer” markets were emerging because America as a whole shifted from being a producer society to a consumer society. People used to make their own food, clothes and even cosmetics but in the advent of advertising and “niche” markets provided a whole array of products at an affordable price. Previous connotations that followed cosmetics were that makeup was used either by the rich or prostitutes, but now anyone and everyone bought them contributing to the consumption rather than production of products. The influx of new immigrants, especially in New York City, at the turn of the twentieth century created a rift between the rich, uptown, snobby, native white born Americans and the poor, ragged, ugly, downtown immigrants. The rich attributed the foulness and filth of the cities to new immigrants and left them to their own devices while assuming they would just stay downtown surrounded by their own refuse. However, not all immigrants fit the mold of a foreign hoodlum. Sara Smolinsky, the main character of the novel Bread Givers, breaks away from her family’s (mainly her father’s) traditional polish immigrant ideology and becomes a teacher. “I don’t want to sell herring for the rest of my days. I want to learn something. I want to do something. I want some day to make myself for a person and come among people.” (Bread Givers 66).
Immigrants generally left their county because they were below the poverty line there and wanted to start a better life in a county where there was opportunity. This was no easy task for a Sara Smolinsky, a poor uneducated immigrant with no formal training. Sara broke away from her oppressive father to live, work, and go to night school all on her own. The tradional ideals of the old country, according to her father Reb, were: to get a job at a very young age and give one’s wages back to the family, get married, start a family, and die. Women were known as child-bearers and that’s it. “The ideal of the “New Woman” represented a departure from concepts of female identity constituted solely in domestic pursuits, sexual purity, and morality.” (Piess 381). Sara fit the mold of the new woman and thus she had an extra obstacle to surmount. She had to overcome the fact that she was a woman and was supposed to be married and with kids at a young age and the stereotype that immigrants just perpetuated the unpleasantness of urban environments. Sara valued education rather than having her father marry her off to an eligible suitor as he did with her other three sisters. Reb Smolinsky was an extremly holy man and lived his life according to the Torah. “It says in the Torah, only through a man has a woman an existence. Only through a man can a woman enter Heaven.” (Bread Givers 137). These time-honored traditions imposed by her father were meant to oppress her, but Sara had a strong enough will to start her own journey.
“My will is as strong as yours. I’m going to live my own life. Nobody can stop me. I’m not from the old country. I’m American!” (Bread Givers 138). Sara was always an outcast ever since she didn’t succumb to her father’s will. Her father called her “blood and iron” and instead of taking his overt criticism as a term of endearment and thus surrendering to her father’s tyrannical nature, she triumphed over his subjugation in her fight to be American. However, Sara was faced with the harsh reality that she wasn’t a native born American citizen at college. “By all their differences from me, their youth, their shiny freshness, their carefreeness, they pulled me out of my sense to them. And they didn’t even know I was there.” (Bread Givers 213). College in the early twentieth century wasn’t meant for just anyone. There wasn’t as much financial aid as there is now and it was a privilege of the rich to continue education at the university level. “She nodded politely and smiled. But how quickly her eyes sized me up! It was not an unkind glance. And yet, it said more plainly than words, “From where did you come? How did you get in here?”” (Bread Givers 214). Sara had endure the judging eyes of her orthodox father at home and the scornful eyes of the affluent college students who indirectly made her feel like an outcast.
Sara wasn’t only an outcast in the eyes of her father and fellow students. She was ostracized at work too. The other girls who worked at the laundry with her constantly teased Sara for dressing drab and gray everyday. One day Sara mustered up the courage and put on makeup. “I looked in the glass at the new self I had made. Now I was exactly like the others! Red lips, red cheeks, even red roses under the brim of my hat.” (Bread Givers 182). However, she hated applying makeup and hated how she looked. “I felt shamed and confused with my false face. It was as though the rouge had turned into a mask, and I could breathe through the cover.” (Bread Givers 183). The introduction of cosmetics into the consumer society, that also began in the early twentieth century, perpetuated using make up as an everyday product. The rise of the “mass” market made cosmetics abundant and very affordable for everyone. “Mass market manufacturers stressed as a route to upward mobility, arguing that a woman’s personal success relied on her appearance.” (Piess 384) It was thought that women could achieve social acceptance and impress men solely on their complexion. All of the other girls that were Sara’s age wore makeup, as a sign of femininity, but Sara didn’t share their sentiments.
I havent gotten to the conclusion yet.
AMST 072W Prof. Palmer
“You can select ten ordinary girls from a factory and by the skillful use of such preparations as Kijja and proper toilet articles…you can in a short time make them as attractive and good-looking as most any ten wealthy society girls…it is not as much a matter of beauty with different classes of girls as it is how they are fixed up.” (Piess 385). Apparently, the manufacturer who created the pamphlet in which this quote was printed thought that it doesn’t matter how poor and ugly one might be; if cosmetics were applied anyone could look beautiful and regal. In Piess’s essay she discussed the emerging consumer markets that were prevalent in American society during the era surrounding the early twentieth century. The “class, mass, and consumer” markets were emerging because America as a whole shifted from being a producer society to a consumer society. People used to make their own food, clothes and even cosmetics but in the advent of advertising and “niche” markets provided a whole array of products at an affordable price. Previous connotations that followed cosmetics were that makeup was used either by the rich or prostitutes, but now anyone and everyone bought them contributing to the consumption rather than production of products. The influx of new immigrants, especially in New York City, at the turn of the twentieth century created a rift between the rich, uptown, snobby, native white born Americans and the poor, ragged, ugly, downtown immigrants. The rich attributed the foulness and filth of the cities to new immigrants and left them to their own devices while assuming they would just stay downtown surrounded by their own refuse. However, not all immigrants fit the mold of a foreign hoodlum. Sara Smolinsky, the main character of the novel Bread Givers, breaks away from her family’s (mainly her father’s) traditional polish immigrant ideology and becomes a teacher. “I don’t want to sell herring for the rest of my days. I want to learn something. I want to do something. I want some day to make myself for a person and come among people.” (Bread Givers 66).
Immigrants generally left their county because they were below the poverty line there and wanted to start a better life in a county where there was opportunity. This was no easy task for a Sara Smolinsky, a poor uneducated immigrant with no formal training. Sara broke away from her oppressive father to live, work, and go to night school all on her own. The tradional ideals of the old country, according to her father Reb, were: to get a job at a very young age and give one’s wages back to the family, get married, start a family, and die. Women were known as child-bearers and that’s it. “The ideal of the “New Woman” represented a departure from concepts of female identity constituted solely in domestic pursuits, sexual purity, and morality.” (Piess 381). Sara fit the mold of the new woman and thus she had an extra obstacle to surmount. She had to overcome the fact that she was a woman and was supposed to be married and with kids at a young age and the stereotype that immigrants just perpetuated the unpleasantness of urban environments. Sara valued education rather than having her father marry her off to an eligible suitor as he did with her other three sisters. Reb Smolinsky was an extremly holy man and lived his life according to the Torah. “It says in the Torah, only through a man has a woman an existence. Only through a man can a woman enter Heaven.” (Bread Givers 137). These time-honored traditions imposed by her father were meant to oppress her, but Sara had a strong enough will to start her own journey.
“My will is as strong as yours. I’m going to live my own life. Nobody can stop me. I’m not from the old country. I’m American!” (Bread Givers 138). Sara was always an outcast ever since she didn’t succumb to her father’s will. Her father called her “blood and iron” and instead of taking his overt criticism as a term of endearment and thus surrendering to her father’s tyrannical nature, she triumphed over his subjugation in her fight to be American. However, Sara was faced with the harsh reality that she wasn’t a native born American citizen at college. “By all their differences from me, their youth, their shiny freshness, their carefreeness, they pulled me out of my sense to them. And they didn’t even know I was there.” (Bread Givers 213). College in the early twentieth century wasn’t meant for just anyone. There wasn’t as much financial aid as there is now and it was a privilege of the rich to continue education at the university level. “She nodded politely and smiled. But how quickly her eyes sized me up! It was not an unkind glance. And yet, it said more plainly than words, “From where did you come? How did you get in here?”” (Bread Givers 214). Sara had endure the judging eyes of her orthodox father at home and the scornful eyes of the affluent college students who indirectly made her feel like an outcast.
Sara wasn’t only an outcast in the eyes of her father and fellow students. She was ostracized at work too. The other girls who worked at the laundry with her constantly teased Sara for dressing drab and gray everyday. One day Sara mustered up the courage and put on makeup. “I looked in the glass at the new self I had made. Now I was exactly like the others! Red lips, red cheeks, even red roses under the brim of my hat.” (Bread Givers 182). However, she hated applying makeup and hated how she looked. “I felt shamed and confused with my false face. It was as though the rouge had turned into a mask, and I could breathe through the cover.” (Bread Givers 183). The introduction of cosmetics into the consumer society, that also began in the early twentieth century, perpetuated using make up as an everyday product. The rise of the “mass” market made cosmetics abundant and very affordable for everyone. “Mass market manufacturers stressed as a route to upward mobility, arguing that a woman’s personal success relied on her appearance.” (Piess 384) It was thought that women could achieve social acceptance and impress men solely on their complexion. All of the other girls that were Sara’s age wore makeup, as a sign of femininity, but Sara didn’t share their sentiments.
I havent gotten to the conclusion yet.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Generalizing Statement
My generalizing statement for this paper is that the media has perpetuated so many myths, ranging from tautology (MLK/Lincoln) to the quantification of quality by his massive inaugural approval rating, even before Obama did anything as our President.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Media reaction
Mike Tramontelli 1/20/09
Prior to the inauguration there were a lot of literature and articles printed showing the “myths” that surrounded Barack Hussein Obama ranging from his associations wit MLK to how it would be crazier having an African American first lady rather than the conventional white one. However, Obama’s inaugural address addressed many different issues that I thought might have been overlooked. He spoke eloquently for twenty full minutes. It was kind of ironic that the only time that Barack misspoke today was when he was repeating his oath. It’s still really refreshing to hear him speak. He talked about redemption and uprising that seemed to shake everyone in the crowd (in a good way). “Mr. Obama promised to take “bold and swift” action to restore the economy by creating jobs through public works projects, improving education, promoting alternative energy and relying on new technology.” (NYT) Apparently right after the luncheon that Obama had with the members of congress, the White House’s chief of staff placed a hold on all pending regulations until Obama got a chance to see them first. “It doesn’t mean we’re going to agree on everything,” “And I assure you our administration will make mistakes.” (NYT) He knows that on this most glorious of days that our country elected him not only because he was the face of change that an old regime neglected but that he is now poised to lead our great country. Obama also quelled the dissent of the skeptics in his inaugural speech. There was still doubt up until this day that he wouldn’t be able to lead us and his inexperience would hinder what we were trying to accomplish as a country. “What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them.” (Inaugural Address).
After the luncheon, where cancer-stricken Senator Kennedy suffered seizure-like convulsions and was rushed to the hospital but will be released in the morning, Obama signed nominations to his cabinet and the various secretaries of etc… What I found most interesting was that the Republican Senators delayed the nomination of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state because of old conflicts that still might have roots. The myth of Obama v. Clinton wasn’t even touched upon today. Bill and Hillary received roaring applause from the crowd and it seemed that any residual discord was over. I do respect the republican senators for their fortitude even on the day where George W. Bush and Dick Chaney faced jeers and dissent from the crowd. After the ceremony was over Bush flew back to Texas and made a speech that almost sounded like he was validating his presidency. He said that approval polls and pubic dissent weren’t things that guided his presidency. He used the platform of 9/11 and the progress that was made in regard to the struggle to subdue global terrorism. “She told me she was excited about me mowing the lawn and taking out the trash –- it’s my new domestic agenda.” This is what many people who were there would have liked to see Bush do four years ago. I myself didn’t boo the former president but this was the largest inauguration crowd ever and many of these people didn’t approve of Bush and it was heard.
“But although the crowd and the podium around him were full of elated African Americans, Mr. Obama, the first black to become president, did not dwell on that in his speech.” (I’m not sure what were doing for works cited yet for the class but ill just write the publication for right now, NYT) When I was on the mall I was surrounded by every race and ethnicity and it just didn’t matter because the only thing that mattered was the jubilation that everyone shard on this day. He even used the same bible as Lincoln used on his inauguration. Colin Powell, who grew up in times of segregation was meet with cheers and he was quoted as saying that this was a time to tear up in celebration. The centennial of the birth of Abraham Lincoln, another Illinoisan who took the office at a time of national turmoil and a man whom Mr. Obama clearly looks to as an inspiration for his own presidency. I feel that it is a good thing that Obama is following Lincoln’s drive and ideas but I don’t want him to base his presidency on the fact that he needs to be Lincoln. Obama has different topics to deal with and huge problems facing Americans today. In addition when I was on the mall listening to Obama’s speech, I finally realized what turmoil America has to endure throughout his new regime. “Today is about validation of the dream Dr. King enunciated 45 years ago on the steps on the Lincoln Memorial,” said Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina.
Another little tidbit I just saw on the Washington Post was that China censored a part of Obama’s speech. A small portion of his speech dealt with him going off on the oppressive countries and making sure they knew that America wasn’t done. In that portion Obama mention the oppressive forces known as fascism and communism. China was apparently afraid of Obama’s diatribe or they thought that it was a direct shot at China. Whichever is the case, China wants to keep their citizens in the dark. In addition, he was mentioning fascism and communism as a negative factor some countries have and China didn’t want their people to know. I feel that China will be an advantageous ally, if we can get them on our side, but they have to know that we don’t see eye to eye on everything. I thought this was the most pervasive quote of Obama’s speech: “you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.“
Prior to the inauguration there were a lot of literature and articles printed showing the “myths” that surrounded Barack Hussein Obama ranging from his associations wit MLK to how it would be crazier having an African American first lady rather than the conventional white one. However, Obama’s inaugural address addressed many different issues that I thought might have been overlooked. He spoke eloquently for twenty full minutes. It was kind of ironic that the only time that Barack misspoke today was when he was repeating his oath. It’s still really refreshing to hear him speak. He talked about redemption and uprising that seemed to shake everyone in the crowd (in a good way). “Mr. Obama promised to take “bold and swift” action to restore the economy by creating jobs through public works projects, improving education, promoting alternative energy and relying on new technology.” (NYT) Apparently right after the luncheon that Obama had with the members of congress, the White House’s chief of staff placed a hold on all pending regulations until Obama got a chance to see them first. “It doesn’t mean we’re going to agree on everything,” “And I assure you our administration will make mistakes.” (NYT) He knows that on this most glorious of days that our country elected him not only because he was the face of change that an old regime neglected but that he is now poised to lead our great country. Obama also quelled the dissent of the skeptics in his inaugural speech. There was still doubt up until this day that he wouldn’t be able to lead us and his inexperience would hinder what we were trying to accomplish as a country. “What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them.” (Inaugural Address).
After the luncheon, where cancer-stricken Senator Kennedy suffered seizure-like convulsions and was rushed to the hospital but will be released in the morning, Obama signed nominations to his cabinet and the various secretaries of etc… What I found most interesting was that the Republican Senators delayed the nomination of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state because of old conflicts that still might have roots. The myth of Obama v. Clinton wasn’t even touched upon today. Bill and Hillary received roaring applause from the crowd and it seemed that any residual discord was over. I do respect the republican senators for their fortitude even on the day where George W. Bush and Dick Chaney faced jeers and dissent from the crowd. After the ceremony was over Bush flew back to Texas and made a speech that almost sounded like he was validating his presidency. He said that approval polls and pubic dissent weren’t things that guided his presidency. He used the platform of 9/11 and the progress that was made in regard to the struggle to subdue global terrorism. “She told me she was excited about me mowing the lawn and taking out the trash –- it’s my new domestic agenda.” This is what many people who were there would have liked to see Bush do four years ago. I myself didn’t boo the former president but this was the largest inauguration crowd ever and many of these people didn’t approve of Bush and it was heard.
“But although the crowd and the podium around him were full of elated African Americans, Mr. Obama, the first black to become president, did not dwell on that in his speech.” (I’m not sure what were doing for works cited yet for the class but ill just write the publication for right now, NYT) When I was on the mall I was surrounded by every race and ethnicity and it just didn’t matter because the only thing that mattered was the jubilation that everyone shard on this day. He even used the same bible as Lincoln used on his inauguration. Colin Powell, who grew up in times of segregation was meet with cheers and he was quoted as saying that this was a time to tear up in celebration. The centennial of the birth of Abraham Lincoln, another Illinoisan who took the office at a time of national turmoil and a man whom Mr. Obama clearly looks to as an inspiration for his own presidency. I feel that it is a good thing that Obama is following Lincoln’s drive and ideas but I don’t want him to base his presidency on the fact that he needs to be Lincoln. Obama has different topics to deal with and huge problems facing Americans today. In addition when I was on the mall listening to Obama’s speech, I finally realized what turmoil America has to endure throughout his new regime. “Today is about validation of the dream Dr. King enunciated 45 years ago on the steps on the Lincoln Memorial,” said Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina.
Another little tidbit I just saw on the Washington Post was that China censored a part of Obama’s speech. A small portion of his speech dealt with him going off on the oppressive countries and making sure they knew that America wasn’t done. In that portion Obama mention the oppressive forces known as fascism and communism. China was apparently afraid of Obama’s diatribe or they thought that it was a direct shot at China. Whichever is the case, China wants to keep their citizens in the dark. In addition, he was mentioning fascism and communism as a negative factor some countries have and China didn’t want their people to know. I feel that China will be an advantageous ally, if we can get them on our side, but they have to know that we don’t see eye to eye on everything. I thought this was the most pervasive quote of Obama’s speech: “you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.“
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)