Summary # 11

"A More Perfect Union" is a motivational speech given by President Barak Obama before elected president. The speech includes many things one of which is the issue of race. Obama makes it clear that he doesn't want his campaign to be solely based on race. He does not want his candidacy to be seen as another "exercise of affirmative action". (363). However,race has been an ongoing issue through out the campaign. Obama say through out different points of the campaign he has been observed to be "too black" or "not black enough" and this is mostly due to his background. But he would like this candidacy to be about creating a more "perfect union". He mentions frequently his relationship with and the harsh words spoken by Reverend Wright. He responds to the attacks made on him by basically saying that all men have hidden "contradictions" and that these people make up our country. Instead of disowning these people why not confront the issue and deal with it. Obama believes "the past isn't dead and buried. In fact, it isn't even the past."(367). Things that segregate the races still occur today. Schools that a black child attend isn't as good as that of a white child. There is still a "wealth and income gap between black and white". (368). There is still racist anger in both the black and white communities. Obama believes that anger on both of these sides have proved to be "counter-productive". He also believes that we as a nation need to confront these issue as stop using them as distractions. Then we as a nation can come together and focus on the issue that we all face and make ourselves a more "perfect nation".

Summary #10

In "Up Against Wal-Mart" Karen Olsson uses employee accounts, statistics and Wal-Mart policies to inform her readers of how crude Wal-Mart can be. She starts off with a first hand account of an ordinary employee at Wal-Mart. She lets her readers know that this woman, Jennifer Mclaughlin, is a mother who has been with Wal-Mart for three years and "earns only $16,800 a year" and she is considered "high paid". She relies on Medicaid to insure her son because of the price of Wal-Mart's insurance. Now this wouldn't be that big of a deal if this was a little company. However, as Olsson puts it "The company is the world's largest retailer, with $220 billion in sales, and the nation's largest private employer, with 3,372 stores and more than 1 million hourly workers." (344). In other words, this isn't some small company. With the unfairness of all this going on the workers started to sue the company and try to create unions to help get themselves better pay and insurance. "Workers in 27 states are suing Wal-Mart for violating wage-and-hour law..." (344). Do not think Wal-Mart is standing by while this happens. To fight back against these unions Wal-Mart has laid off employees suspicious of favoring or trying to organize an union. In one incident they laid off an entire meat-cutting department after the workers voted to join the UFCW, a union that was organized. The company also "hired a consulting firm named Alpha Associates to develop a 'union avoidance program.'"(347). The retailer also is accused of being unfair between sexes. "(Wal-Mart) also faces a sex-discrimination lawsuit that accuses it of wrongly denying promotions and equal pay to 700,000 women." (344). Now why should we be worried about what is going on at Wal-Mart? Olsson answers this nicely by stating the words of Bernie Hesse, an organizer of the UFCW, "these are the jobs our kids are going to have." (354).

Summary # 9

"The Truth About Wages" by Bruce Bartlett is an informative essay about the ongoing debate over the economic condition of the American workers and their receptiveness towards Republican policies. The author uses many statistics to show how "the average worker is no better off today than he was seven years ago in real terms." (312). He gives the dollar amount of the average weekly earning in August 1999 and August 2006 and the amounts are only cents apart. With all his statistics why the openness towards Republican policies? Bartlett answers this with three reasons. The first reason is that, due to all the current layoffs, American workers that find themselves lucky enough to have a job want to keep it, no matter the wage. He also says " if (workers) switch to another job, that might get higher pay, they might lose their health benefits in the process." (313). Workers do not want to lose their benefits for their families. The second reason is the "changing demographics of the population have eased the transition to an economy with slower wage growth." (314). He says that due to the extra spending money in the pockets of the baby boomers the wage "stagnation" isn't as noticeable. The final reason is that although wages have remained flat lined there has been an increase in people moving into the upper and middle classes. Less people are making less than $25,000. Bartlett concludes, "In short, despite all the talk about the rich getting richer at the expense of the poor, the fact is that the percentage of households with low incomes has fallen and the percentage of those with high incomes has risen." (314-315). These reasons are the foundation which attribute to the "openness" people have towards Republican policies according to Bruce Bartlett.

Summary # 8

Ever wonder why you are so smart when it comes to facts you are interested in and not so smart when it comes to school subjects? If you are anything like Gerald Graff you have. His essay "Hidden Intellectualism" is about exactly that people, especially youths, who excel at things such as sports and don't do so well with subjects in school. Graff uses this essay to explain his idea that the problem isn't that the children who fall into this category aren't intellectuals the problem is that schools aren't "capitalizing" on the benefits of using things that the youths are interested in to capture them. Graff explains that although some of the subjects that attract the youth of today's attention, such as cars, is not exactly textbook material our schools can use these subjects to attract students and keep the material they are learning interesting. He quotes Ned Laff, a college professor, who states "is not simply to exploit students' nonacademic interests, but to get them to see those interests through academic eyes."and then elaborates on that viewpoint. (302). The author is saying that our schools need to realize that if we can get students to absorb the information needed and to practice the skills needed by using a subject that captures their interests and the students do this in a " reflective, analytical way" than they are still learning what they need to be and doing it in a way that they want to learn and they will more readily remember. If we overlook this or write it off than maybe we are overlooking an irreplaceable learning tool.

Summary # 7

In "The I.M.s of Romeo and Juliet" Roz Chast uses a cartoon to express how laid-back people, especially teens and youth, are getting with their conversations among other things. The cartoonist takes the old and very intricate novel of "Romeo and Juliet" and translates it into the language that today's youth would use. To fully grasp where the author/illustrator was headed with her humor the reader needs to have heard of the original "Romeo and Juliet", which most people today have. In the original the characters use very articulate and proper language and they are verbally talking to one another because they didn't have the technologies of nowadays. In Chast's cartoon the characters are utilizing the technology we have by texting each other over the computer. Instead of using correct English the characters use slang, such as "lol" for laughter and "rents" for parents. They don't even right out words such as too or why; instead they use abbreviations such as "2" or "y'". The words alone in this cartoon express the author's opinion. However, if the reader still doesn't get the gust of the author's purpose, they can simply glance at the illustration around it. Both of the characters are sitting or laying in front of a screen while the entire room they are in is a mess; there are cans books, food, electronic devices, etc.. laying on the ground around them. Chast is trying to display that today's youth is becoming more and more lazy with the recent advances in things such as our technology.

Summary #6

In the article "Family Guy and Freud: Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious" Antonia Peacocke describes how the jokes in Family Guy if looked at deeper than just face value actually have a more insightful meaning. Before going into this the author describes the hardships of the television show Family Guy, having been cancelled twice. She later uses this to show how "high profile" the show is by saying "Most importantly,each time it was cancelled fans provided the brute force necessary to get it back on the air." (261). She uses different numbers and awards to show how devoted the shows fans are and how well the show is actually doing. Peacocke talks about her own struggle with the shows seemingly offensive humor but then how she realizes the underlying "satire" of the jokes. The author uses different segments of the show to display how although the jokes are, at first glance, offensive the hidden meaning is simply "pointing out the weaknesses and defects of U.S. society in a mocking and sometimes intolerable way." (263). Antonia Peacocke uses excerpts from different authors to shape her argument, agreeing with some and pointing fun at others. She recognizes some of the steps taken due to the fact that the content of some of the jokes are not for younger ears. She ends her article explaining that although she feels that there is more to the jokes on Family Guy than the offensive crudity that people like to point out she still finds that people still need to realize that some jokes do go to far and take to heart "the distinction between a shamelessly candid but insightful joke and a merely shameless joke". (266).

Summary # 4

"Lawsuits Against Fast-Food Restaurants Are an Effective Way Combat Obesity" by John H. Banzhaf III is an essay explaining the benefits of the lawsuits against the fast food industries. Banzhaf describes how the new lawsuits brought against the fast food industries are an efficient way to halter obesity and other things. He feels that by preventing these lawsuits our country is not giving consequences for the part these restaurants play in the rise in obesity in the last couple of decades. As a result, the government is hindering a useful tool in holding the restaurants liable. The author consistently compares fast food industries to tobacco companies and the laws governing the fast food industries to the laws that govern tobacco. For example, in response to the comment that the lawsuits are "frivolous" Banzhaf states "the nonsmoker lawsuits, and the lawsuits by the states against the tobacco industry, were all initially frivolous."(164) and that "industries do not need protection against lawsuits which are truly frivolous, only those lawsuits which judges, juries and appellate courts are likely to take seriously." (164). In other words restaurants would not be so worried about these lawsuits if they were inconsequential. Banzhaf goes on to address a new bill that excludes restaurants from liability in food litigation. He finds this bill to be "premature- if not presumptuous and preposterous-" (164). The author feels that if restaurants would simply take certain precautions, such as displaying calorie information where the food is purchased, provide warnings and providing nutritious choices, industries would save themselves of the legal hassles. However, Banzhaf believes that if we stop lawsuits before they even happen trying to solve this problem it is just taking away the only weapon people have and granting the companies freedom from their liability.