Op-Ed

Wonder Woman
By: Danielle Denning


The big question on everyone’s mind today is whether Sarah Palin is qualified to be the next Vice President. Given that there are no specific guidelines to tell us what makes a good Vice President, a lot of people are having a hard time finding an answer to this question.
Sarah Palin made history on December 4, 2006 when she became the first woman ever elected as governor of Alaska. Foreshadowing of the future? Not only did she conquer this election, but she defeated an incumbent democratic candidate. Under her leadership, the Alaska Gas line Inducement Act (AGIA) was passed in House Bill 3001. AGIA permits TC Alaska to construct a 1,715 mile natural gas line providing America with safe and domestic sources of energy. While we all know that oil will not always be a reliable source of energy in the future, right now it is essential to our economy. Because of Sarah Palin and Alaska we have secured a reliable domestic source. Amazingly, AGIA is only one of Palin’s accomplishments in office. She is a leader of Alaska Conservation Commission, Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission, Alaska National Guard, and Governors Association National Resource Committee. Does Barak Obama do this much as Senator of Illinois?
In an MSNBC interview, former speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich was hounded about Sarah Palin’s qualifications compared to Obama. Gingrich responded that “Sarah Palin is a whistle blower who defeated an incumbent mayor and turned in the chairman of her own party and had him fined $12,000. When did Obama ever have the guts to do that?” While this response may not address Palin’s achievements, it certainly addresses her outstanding ethics.
Unfortunately, this is the very subject that has wrongly come into question in today’s news. Every last measure has been taken by Obama’s team to dig up secrets and destroy Sarah Palin’s good reputation. I find it somewhat humorous however to see how futile their attempts have been. The most democratic investigators could dig up was the Wootengate scandal. I applaud their efforts to bring down Palin and they came quite close, unfortunately for them, McCain’s camp was one step ahead.
Wootengate refers to Sarah Palin’s alleged abuse of office when she fired Public Safety Commissioner, Walt Monegan, which he claims is because he wouldn’t fire a state trooper. I will admit that her actions may be just cause for an investigation, but what Obama’s camp conveniently left out was the reason for her actions. When they leaked the scandal to the press did they forget to tell us that the state trooper in question had been tazoring his ten year old son? There are two sides to every story. Whether she abused her office or stood up for a little boy is completely a matter of opinion.
When the incident was first being investigated by a legislative inquiry in January, prior to her Vice President nomination, Palin agreed to fully co-operate. However, when the issue became more of an attack by the Democratic Party rather than a bipartisan investigation, Palin obviously changed her mind. The legislative inquiry led by Democratic senator Hollis French was said to be “planning the investigation as an ‘October Surprise’ before election day.” What exactly is nonpartisan and fair about that? In response, Palin filed a complaint against herself with the Alaska State Personnel Board, which investigates ethics complaints against executive branch employees. Going through this system will allow Palin to be fairly investigated without party intervention. Many have called her a coward, but what exactly is cowardly about refusing to be pushed around and targeted? This so called scandal has revealed more about the tricks of Obama’s campaign than it has anything about Sarah Palin’s ethics.
Sarah Palin has shown us time after time that she is capable of holding her own with the men who dominate politics. Not only does this portray much of her character but it empowers women everywhere. She is mother of five children with a 16 year reign in politics and numerous substantial achievements. What can’t she do? It’s time for Sarah Palin to make history, a second time.

Authors Note:
This is definately my first draft of the article. I didn't spend as much time as I would have liked writing it and I know there is room for a lot of improvement.

Any time of corrections or suggestions is welcome!

Op-Ed Venue/Audience

My target audience for this op-ed article will be college students. I think it has become apparent that college age students are very important in this years election. Candidates are focusing their campaigns towards this new demographic more and more every day with slogans like "Rock the Vote" and "Declare Yourself". I believe that students, like me and my friends, can make a huge impact on this election if we decide to get out there and vote. I don't want to sway students to vote for one candidate or another but I want to write something that will make them care about the election. As a student myself, I know that all it takes is a little nudge to get interested in what's going on with the election. If a student agrees with the point I am trying to make then maybe that will be enough to inspire them to vote. If a student disagrees with my point then even better. All it took for me to get interested was reading an article that I completely disagreed with. After that, all I wanted to do was research until I could prove the author wrong or prove myself wrong. College students have so much potential to be well informed voters and that is why I want to target them as my audience.

Because I want to target college students, I am going to publish my op-ed article in the Daily Skiff, the TCU Newspaper. I think this will be a good venue to reach students.

Arguments of Fact

The argument I'm bringing to class is called "Governor Palin Supports a New "Road to Nowhere". As you can probably guess the article is about how as governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, supported government funding of a bridge that essentially was never needed. The Bridge to Nowhere was an attempt to create a road leading from a small town in Alaska to Anchorage. Supporters claimed the inability of residents to quickly get to a major hospital was a health hazard. I liked this article because it helped me re-affirm what I was trying to say in my letter to the editor. My point was that I don't care what side you are arguing for just give me proof. I found that the writer of this article backed up everything he had to say with legitimate facts and evidence of research. Regardless of whether I am a Democrat or Republican, I am more likely to agree with a writer who shows me why he/she is right.

The article full fills the requirements of chapter 7 in almost every aspect. The author clearly identifies the issue he wishes to discuss at the very beginning of the article. He also provides relevant facts that support his claims, not just random information to make it sound legitimate. The author gives exact amounts of money that were given to Alaska. He doesn't say they were offered a lot of money or they wanted to use a lot of land. Every single time he makes a claim it is supported with hard evidence.

Letter to the Editor

I found your September 7th editorial on John McCain’s “shotgun marriage” to Sarah Palin interestingly ironic. Within the article you boldly point out McCain’s “preference for gut instinct over facts”, yet I found no instance in your own writing of accusations backed up with proven facts or evidence of research.
I find myself perplexed, not by your unconfirmed accusations or your twisting of information, but by your constant questioning of who Sarah Palin really is. My question to you is- why not go research it yourself? So far, you and many others have defined Sarah Palin solely by unproven allegations made against her by her opponents. At first, I thought you were taking a step in the right direction by actually asking who the real Sarah Palin is. However, it then became apparent that you never had the intention of answering your own question. My guess is that you know behind all the superficial gossip, we will find Sarah Palin to be an honest hard working woman, who is very capable of being a Vice Presidential candidate.
And yes, maybe then you can finally stop wasting our time questioning whether she actually shot a moose.
I think your constant unanswered question also leads us to a deeper issue- your inability to do credible research. I will admit that I don’t know the truth about Sarah Palin’s past but how do you? Frank Rich, writer for the New York Times, how do you know more about Palin’s indiscretions than even the FBI? I am almost positive that not even they have confirmed the statements that you hold as facts in your article. Therefore, my argument with you is not what I believe Sarah Palin did or did not do, but where in the world you did your research or lack thereof.
Once again, you bring up the issue of Palin’s vetting process, I ask you- where’s the beef? You claimed that Sarah Palin’s biological details were “invented for her”. I searched the paragraph over and over and found that your only indication of proof was that “the Times had it right”. According to whom? Which FBI agent volunteered the information that Palin never got a background check? I’m not looking to prove one thing or another; however, I find that issues concerning our next president or vice president should be backed up by more than “because the Times says so”.
You so brilliantly ended your article with the statement “America loves nothing more than a new celebrity face”. Well Mr. Rich, I think I agree with you. But even more than that, I think we like our ability to take a good person and magnify every little flaw, until that good person no longer exists in the public eye.
Any writer can spread gossip in an effort to prove a point or entertain. However, it takes a courageous writer to use only what he can prove.


Authors Note:
This is definitely my first draft of writing. It's pretty much what came flying out of my head and onto a piece of paper yesterday when I sat down to write.

I'm not sure that I like how the article sounds yet. I'm happy with the content and what I am arguing just not how I go about it so far. When re-reading it I found that it sounds very judgmental and harsh and I don't think that's how I want it to come across. I think in the next draft I'm definitely going to edit a lot.

Any grammar suggestions (because I know I'm horrible at that) and any suggestions on rewording or how you think I should make it sound "nicer" would be greatly appreciated.

Article for Letter to the Editor

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/opinion/07rich.html?em

op-ed

Topic and Editorial

My topic for unit one is McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as candidate for VP. This topic includes questioning how McCain chose Palin and what this reveals about him and the truth behind accusations against Sarah Palin. The editorial I found is called "Palin and McCain's Shotgun Marriage" by Frank Rich.

I'm not completely positive on where I want to go with this topic so far but I think the controversy concerning the effort put in by McCain to research Palin is interesting. The standards of researching VP candidates for nomination is called the "vetting process". The argument in the news right now is whether McCain actually put Sarah Palin through this process or if he chose her as a spur of the moment pick. If so, what do we not know about Palin and what does this say about McCain's ability to make good choices.

I like this topic a lot because it really plays into our discussion about how facts can be manipulated to reach different conclusions. For example, the other day I read an article about how Palin unjustly used her political position to get her brother in law (or something along those lines) removed from his job as a police officer. However, when interviewed the author admitted that Palin's had done this because the brother-in-law had been using his tazor on his 6 year old son. Stories can be spun in any direction direction depending on how it is told. I think this is the case for the article I found. Many of the accusations may be true but I am interested to see how much is left out.

The article I found is focused on two major issues. The first is McCain's ability to make well thought out decisions and second, Sarah Palin's credibility as a VP.

Political Topics

One issue I have about this years election is the difference in campaigning strategies. I know that both candidates are putting in a lot of effort to get the younger population out there to vote. And while I think it is an amazing thing that teenagers are suddenly taking an interest in our government, in my opinion this whole election has been more of a popularity contest than anything. When Paris Hilton is the center of a campaign add and Oprah supporting Obama is headline news something has gone terribly wrong. The fact is a presidential election should be about a candidates capabilities and beliefs, not about how many celebrities support them. As a society it seems like we are more preoccupied with Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter or what designer Michelle Obama is wearing. What about Obama's stance on the war in Iraq or McCain's stance on health care?

I understand that Sarah Palin's daughter is a pregnant 17 year old, but what does that have to do with her abilities as a Vice President of the United States? Blaming Sarah Palin would be like me calling my mother and telling her it's her fault that I am pregnant and therefore, she cannot possibly be good at her job as an accountant. (Fake Scenario) Regardless, my question is what does any of this have to do with our government and how people should vote in the election?

I'm not sure that I would write an entire paper over this subject but the fact that apparently Oprah can sway millions of voters to vote for Obama is a topic I am very interested in.

The war in Iraq is one of the legitimate issues of this election that I am interested in. I will admit that I know very little about this topic compared to many other people but it is still an important issue to me. I still don't know exactly where I side on this subject.

I know that there are thousands of men and women in Iraq right now fighting and dying for Americans like me and you. Because of that I think it would be wrong to say that I don't agree with the cause they are dying for. Many people say that there is no good reason why we should be over in Iraq. My rationalization of it, as naive as it may be, is that why would hundreds of people in our government agree that it would be in America's best interest to go to war if it wasn't? I guess the relevant question of today's election would be to end the war or not. I think I would really enjoy researching what both candidates have to say about this subject and forming my opinion from there.

Logos Argument

My argument for tomorrow is a picture of a cigarette and some of the many contents that cigarettes are made of, for example, paint, toilet cleaner, barbecue lighter, and much more. I think that this picture is obviously making the argument that smoking is bad for your health, which is probably a well known fact by now. This add is an example of logos because it boldly presents you with evidence as to the harmful products used to make cigarettes. In this case it is an argument that needs few words to get the point across.

The argument effects past, present, and future because cigarettes, or tobacco, have been a part of our culture for a very long time. A few decades ago we had no idea that cigarettes could effect our health in any way, however; now we are conducting many studies to further investigate the health issues linked to smoking. Pictures like this effect our future because they help us make better judgements about what we put in our bodies.

I think the target of this argument is pretty much everyone who has ever thought about smoking or does smoke.

It would be easy to create an argument about this topic using pathos because the topic of lung cancer and death is a sentimental topic for everyone. However, I think using logos is also a strong choice because informing people of the facts about cigarettes may sway them more.

Sample Argument #1

The argument that our group decided to use is a picture of a football player after his championship game. The man is making a celebratory gesture with his hands and appears to be jumping in the air with a smile on his face. The context of this argument is that the man in the picture played football for a team who was expected to lose the final game. Or in other words they were the underdogs. Contrary to all expectations, the team ended up winning the championship. The football player in the picture is arguing that you should never underestimate anyone or any team.

I would say that this argument could be meaningful to just about anyone, but in this instance the man is speaking to all the other teams who underestimated him. When we underestimate things we tend to not give it our all and a lot of the time we fail. This picture is a classic example of our human tendency to undervalue each other.

Another argument we looked at in our group was "Making the Grade by Eating Smart" from my school planner. This statement makes the argument that if you eat the right types of food you can make good grades in school. While there seems to be some correlation between eating healthy and doing well in school, I think the argument out reaches itself. To me "Making the Grade by Eating Smart" says that all you have to do is eat the right things and getting good grades will just happen. Regardless of this, I do think the argument is a positive message for college students and a step in the right direction.