Tag Archives: rclspring2013

CI 4

Posted on by
1

We have already taken a look at the history behind affirmative action, and we have seen the case that is currently being decided on by the Supreme Court. We know that affirmative action was started because it was necessary to balance out racial prejudices in the workplace and in college admissions. Affirmative Action policies have not changed since. College admissions affirmative action was challenged about a decade ago and is being challenged again. Both sides of the affirmative action argument have valid points at the surface, but if we look deep into the issue, and think about the long term future of this country, it is clear that affirmative action’s time is up and it should be made illegal.

 

Martin Luther King Jr. once said “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” This is the exact opposite of affirmative action. Many schools will say that race is only a minor factor in admissions, but the fact of the matter is that to some extent, no matter how small, college applicants are being admitted or denied opportunity based on the color of their skin. Shouldn’t we be judging people by their character instead? Isn’t that what Martin Luther King Jr. wanted?

 

I understand the fears of those who are for affirmative action. Many people believe that if you do not have a certain number of each racial group identified in an academic setting (called a “critical mass”) then the one racial group will feel ostracized and will not express their opinions in the academic setting. But don’t we want a future in which people’s opinions are not defined by their skin color? The whole goal of the racial equality movement is to bring a day upon the United States in which people are seen by others as individuals, and not as a White guy, a Black girl or Asian guy. Yet isn’t this what affirmative action does? Doesn’t affirmative action define someone by their skin color rather than his or her character and individuality? Affirmative action only perpetuates the racism that it claims to try to prevent. If you want a racial minority to feel confident enough that he or she is not an outcast, then stop making the racial distinctions in the admissions process that defined him or her as an outcast. If we truly want a future in which everyone is seen as racial equals, as a unified academic body, then we need to stop defining how many people of each race is required in an academic setting.

 

Simply stated, I am saying that the problem of racial inequality is not going to be solved by affirmative action, rather inhibited. I am NOT saying that killing affirmative action will solve the racial inequality problem in the U.S. I argue that the problem is that in our country’s attempt to be fair to all the races, we have had to make distinctions between the races that have ended up dividing people rather than unifying them. It is a huge contradiction to say that we want a racially fair and unified academic body for a college, and then distinguish one race from another in admissions. If the future of this country is the need to see every skin color in the same light, then we need to actually try to see every skin color in the same light. Affirmative action is past its time. Affirmative action is unconstitutional and does not solve racial inequality issues. Affirmative action is a policy that attempts to counter racism by promoting racial inequality. True racial equality comes in the form of color-blindness where every college applicant is judged by their character, and not their race.

 

Sources:

 

News.yahoo.com

 

Huffington post

 

Law.Cornell.edu

My Favorite Tarantino Movies

Posted on by
Reply

It is not secret that director Quentin Tarantino is pretty out there. He is an odd fellow with a very vivid imagination. If you have ever seen any of the movies he has directed, then you know what I am talking about. He is known for very imaginative and unconventional screenplays, breaking the standards for what is considered “good” films, and creating strange characters with bizarre backgrounds and motives. Tarantino is not my favorite director of all time, but I think he is important for people to support. The movie industry needs directors like Tarantino to constantly be pushing the boundaries of the conventions of movies in order to keep the film industry in constant change. Directors like Tarantino challenge what the audience deems acceptable, and I applaud him for that, which is why I want to list a few of my favorite movies he directed. I won’t say that I could watch all these movies back to back, but a Tarantino movie once in a while is thought-provoking and refreshing.

 

4. Kill Bill vol. 1

Unknown-1

Bloody Bloody Bloody. This film is a tribute to all of the foreign martial arts movies that came into American markets a few decades ago. Martial arts + Blood + good story line + revenge is the equation for this one. Very fun movie to watch if you are bored.

3. Django Unchained

DjangoUnchained_t607

Tarantino’s most recent film was a hit in the awards season of 2013. I won’t go into the film because I have another blog post dedicated to it, but you should see it when it comes out of DVD if you didn’t see it in theaters. Very fun, but again, bloody.

2. Inglorious Bastards

Unknown-1

This film, starring Brad Pitt, is about a group of WWII Jewish-American soldiers who go on a mission to Nazi Germany with one mission: To kill Nazis. This borderline parody of WWII and the Nazi regime contains a lot of humor, and even more blood. If you are looking for a film to watch when you are angry and feel vengeful, this is the movie for you. It was nominated for a ton of awards. Must see.

1. Pulp Fiction

images

If you haven’t seen this one, all I can say to you is go watch it right now. This movie is a classic, and is an embodiment of Tarantino. The plot is very imaginative, yet non-sensable. The characters are crazy and seem to have no continuity behind them. The film could be argued to have a hundred different themes, or no themes at all. It is just one of those crazy, amazing movies that everyone must see in their lifetime. It is very quotable, and oh yeah, there is a good amount of blood too.

 

*Posters from IMDb

WIP 10

Posted on by
Reply

I have struggled with the topic for my advocacy project, but I think that I have finally come up with something. I didn’t really want to be too political, and wanted to do something that a wide range of people would respond to. My topic will be on second hand smoke, especially in regard to children. There is a proposed law in Texas right now that I believe should become a national law. Basically the law would say that it is illegal to smoke while children are present in either a closed space or close proximity to the smoker. Here is my plan:

Purpose: I want to advocate either people not smoking around children, or people to join some type of movement that would get this law passed.

Strategy: There are a lot of negative effects of second hand smoking, especially when it comes to children in their development phase. I could use a lot of emotional appeals to show how smoking around kids is a very bad thing.

Audience: My audience is very very broad for this. Everyone was a child once and therefore can relate to the protection of health for children. I honestly can’t think of anyone who this project would not relate to.

 

As far as the type of media I will use, I am torn between a video and a podcast. I like podcasts because they are like small radio speeches and I think it is fun to persuade with your voice. However, with a video I could add images that would enhance the emotional appeal.

Olympus is Falling….All the way down….

Posted on by
1

This past week I had the pleasure of seeing the new film, “Olympus has Fallen”. My hope is that after this post, I would have spared you from the pleasure of ever seeing it in your lifetime. It was poor on so many levels, I do not know where to start.

Olympus_Has_Fallen_30

Pros: The cinematography of the film was actually quite good. The camera angles in the action scenes added suspense to the film, which was complimented by a good score. Other than that, I cannot say much good about the movie.

Cons: The story is so unrealistic, it ruined everything. EVERYTHING. The premise of the movie is that North Koreans attack and eventually take over the White House (aka Olympus). It is up to one former secret service agent to stop them. (Die Hard anyone?) What got me was the North Koreans plan to take over the White house. Step one: Fly a plane over it and distract everyone. Step two. Drive up and shoot everyone. Step three. Walk in. It was so hilariously stupid. ONE. Planes cannot fly even remotely close to the White House. After 9/11 the restricted airspace around D.C. goes for miles. Any plane with a heading toward the white house would be shot down before even getting within a mile of it. TWO. There are so many federal agents in D.C. its scary. I can promise you that if you are at the gates of the White House, you are in the sights of at least two dozen rooftop snipers and many more undercover field agents. Nobody could traverse the White House lawn. THREE. In the event that the White House was compromised, the Pentagon could easily stop anyone from getting into the computer system.

The plot was completely laughable and not even remotely entertaining. This is a movie you should avoid. It can best be described as a crappy Die Hard without Bruce Willis and with a plot that is 200x more unbelievable. Even Morgan Freeman couldn’t resurrect this film.

Grade: D+

Verdict. DO NOT SEE. WATCH ANYTHING ELSE.

Civics Issues 3

Posted on by
Reply

I have spoken a lot about the core of the issue of affirmative action in the workplace and the college admissions process. There are a lot of sides to this issue, and a lot of moral and legal questions that surround it. These questions have boiled up to another Supreme Court case today that is awaiting a ruling: Fisher v. University of Texas. This is a tricky case that will certainly have an impact no matter the ruling on all college admissions processes. Here are the details on the case:

Background:

Abigail Fisher, a Texas native, filed a law suit in 2008 against the University of Texas at Austin. She was denied admission to the school and claims to have been denied the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment. She claims that because of her race, she was denied admission into the school. This claim is very hard to prove, but Fisher has a good case. At University of Texas, there is a program which requires the automatic acceptance of students who went to high schools in the state of Texas and who graduated in the top ten percent of their graduating class. If Fisher was in the top ten percent of her class, she would have been accepted automatically. However, she was in the top TWELVE percent of her class. Very close, but failing to make this cutoff means she is subjected to many factors of the regular admissions process such as merit, grades, service acts, and of course, race. Fisher had good grades (Barely missing the cutoff for automatic acceptance), had a good resume, and her SAT scores were right in the median range of scores for accepted applicants at the University. It seems like, even though she didn’t make the cutoff, that she should have been admitted for she fit all the criteria for the admissions process. She was denied and has pointed to the only factor in admissions that gave her a disadvantage: her race.

UNIVERSITY ARGUMENT

The University argues that their admissions process is fair based on the previous ruling of Grutter v. Bollinger. This ruling simply states that schools are not allowed to set quotas for each race in admittance, but can admit a “critical mass” of a certain race. This critical mass is defined as a large enough number of a certain racial group in the college that would allow individuals within the racial group to feel as though they are not alienated. In essence, schools can predetermine how many people of each race they want to admit, but can put preference on a certain race in admissions if they feel they have not reached a such critical mass. To many, a critical mass is just another name for a quota, but proponents of the critical mass theory say that with a critical mass, individual achievement still remains a constant factor of admissions throughout the whole process while quotas may simply focus on race.

FISHER ARGUMENT

Fisher’s lawyers are arguing that the critical mass theory is bogus and is just backward logic to define what is actually a race quota. They also argue that by putting preference on someone in admissions based on their race, schools are not affording each person equal protection under the law. It seems as though Fisher’s side is making an argument saying that the current law in not fair and unconstitutional while the University is saying that they are just following the rules set by the previous court’s ruling. In the oral arguments, it was said that the Justices wished to hear more from the University’s side that justify using affirmative action, but found the University’s answers lacking.

Potential Rulings

Full Fisher: The court will overrule the Grutter v. Bollinger case and will make affirmative action unconstitutional in the college admissions process. Schools will have to use other factors to determine how diverse a student can make the University other than race.

Full University of Texas: The court will rule that the current Affirmative Action policies are constitutional and that schools may continue using race as a factor of admission. This would say that Affirmative Action is not against the 14th Amendment.

No Standing ruling: The court may also dismiss the case. Before they can rule on the constitutionality of the issue, they must determine if Fisher has standing in the case. This means that Fisher must prove that she is directly effected by the actions she is accusing the University of. That is, she must prove that race was the only factor that denied her entry into the school. This case has passed through the lower courts without this ruling, but experts say it is still possible, and would essentially be a victory for the University because affirmative action policies would not change.

Please let me know how YOU think the court should rule. The last blog will talk about the potential impacts of the ruling of this case and how affirmative action (or lack thereof) will effect college admissions in the future.

 

HuffingtonPost

NYTimes

Wikipedia

Utexas.edu

 

WIP8

Posted on by
Reply

For my essay, I believe that I am going to argue against the use of race as a determining factor in college admissions. Simply put, I don’t think that colleges should even care about the color of your skin and should take the colorblind approach. Instead of a 5 paragraph essay here, it would benefit me more to construct an outline with my thoughts on what I would put on each section. I welcome comments and suggestions. Thanks.

 

Intro: Here I want to start off with a captivating hook. Its important to build ethos right in the beginning of the essay which I plan on doing by talking about my recent experience in the college application process. After the anecdote about my experience, I will state my thesis and introduce the current supreme court case that could change the current policy on this issue.

Body1: I will introduce the facts of this issue by talking about the court case. I can talk about both positions in the case as a means of introducing facts of the issue. This will require extensive research.

Body2: Here I would like to talk about why people should agree with me. Here I can use the Constitution as a tool of ethos and logos to present my point. This would be considered my confirmation.

Body3: I plan to refute the points of the opposing argument. I definitely need to do research, but I think it would be good to start a moral argument. Questioning the morality of admitting a student because of race would be a good idea here.

Body4: I Think It would be smart here to introduce a new side of this issue. It could possibly be another counter argument or a bigger picture kind of thing. “It doesn’t only effect individuals applying to colleges, but it effects the entire labor market as a whole”…

Conclusion: Sum it all up, add some nice pathos and logos, end with a strong closing sentence.

Leonardo DiCaprio

Posted on by
Reply

Alright so this week I decided to make a list of the top five movies with Leonardo DiCaprio. He is one of my favorite actors, and I think its sad that he has never received an Oscar for any of his performances. Just from his looks alone he deserves one. (Many people argue that he is past his physical prime and that he is most attractive in his older movies, but I would say he’s still got it.) I would just like to note that this list is not purely based on the quality of the movies, but rather the quality of Leo’s acting in each movie. SPOILER ALERT: Titanic is NOT #1.

 

5.      Inception

Hopefully this is a film we have all seen before. This is one of my favorite movies that Leo is in, however, not my favorite performance by him. Much of the movie is about his struggle to cope with loss of his wife, the exile from his family, and the pressures of his high-stakes job. I think the directing and editing helps exaggerate his story and builds sympathy for his character, but I also think his acting could be a little deeper.

 

4.     The Departed

This is a fantastic movie and you should definitely watch it if you haven’t. In this film, Leo has to act as a character with a dangerous double life and bounce between the law and the Irish mob. He portrays this struggle well and the audience is able to feel the emotions of his character. Add Jack Nicholson as the antagonist and you have a winning movie.

 

3.     Blood Diamond

This is very intense thriller film that keeps you on edge for its entire duration. In this one, Leo plays a diamond trafficker in Africa and works for gangs in the trade of blood diamonds. Leo has the internal struggle between what is right and wrong, or if there even is a right or wrong. Leo is a great actor when it comes to emotions and is very good at letting the reader understand his character’s struggles through his actions. Great film and great performance by DiCaprio.

 

2.     Titanic

MPW-73782

I mean, its Titanic. You really don’t have to say much more about it. I don’t care if you call it a chick flick or not, its just a fantastic movie. The love story is classic and the plot, though tragic, is very emotional. I wouldn’t cast anyone else for the movie besides DiCaprio. Its always a good time to watch this movie.

 

1.      The Aviator

340403.1010.A

I’ll start off by saying that this film is VERY long and has many slow and dry parts in the middle of it. If you have a short attention span, this will be a struggle to watch. DiCaprio plays film director and American aviator, Howard Hughes. It is a very interesting, and apparently realistic, account of Hughes’ life including his struggle with OCD. Not only is Hughes’ life filled with emotional struggles from his parents’ death, multiple female partner failures, and constant pressure and stress, he also has to deal with OCD and intense constant physical pain. This is a hard feat for any actor and Leo does it PERFECTLY. Throughout the entire movie, I felt like I actually was a part of Hughes’ life and felt the pain he felt. The only shining star of the movie is Leo’s acting and he certainly deserved Best Actor for this one. Best performance by DiCaprio by far.

 

Honorable mention: Catch me if you Can   Shutter Island    Gangs of New York

Silver Linings Playbook

Posted on by
6

This week I decided to talk about an underrated movie that came out a little while ago, but seems to be getting more attention now. I just watched the film, Silver Linings Playbook, and I have to say I am impressed. I do not know how this movie slipped under the radar of so many people, but I am glad it is being brought to justice now.

 

 

I’ll start off by saying that, based on the ads I had seen for this movie, I thought I was going to be seeing a chick flick. I was wrong. This movie is one that is hard to put in any one genre of film. To me, it was mostly a drama with elements of both the melodrama and comedy genres as well. I won’t spoil the plotline, but the movie is about a man named Pat (Bradley Cooper) who is struggling with a mental illness and a hard divorce all at the same time. His entire life went down the drain and he has to struggle with the feelings of wanting get his old life back, while knowing he needs to let everything go and start a new life.

 

The performances by both Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence are fantastic.  Both have to play parts of people who are struggling with a mental illness (which I would imagine is not an easy role to act out) and both do a great job. Their acting draws the audience in and makes the audience really care about both characters. Another hidden gem in this movie is the performance by Robert Di Nero. He has a supporting role, but it is impossible to overlook his acting in this film. If you are like me and love anything Di Nero, you need to see this movie.

 

Overall this was a thought provoking film with a unique and interesting plot line performed by great actors.

 

 

Grade: A-

 

Verdict: They kept it in theaters longer because it took a while to get recognition. Its still in theaters now and you HAVE to see it. Looking for a good new movie to see? This is it.

WIP7

Posted on by
Reply

Proposal for persuasive essay:

My civics issues blog has been about Affirmative Action in the workplace and in college admissions. This is an issue I feel pretty strongly about and I am firmly against Affirmative Action, especially in the college admissions area. The whole topic of Affirmative Action is broad and I think it would be good for me to narrow it down to just talking about college admissions. It is my belief that schools should not consider race as a factor of college admissions. Schools rationalize using race in admissions because they believe people with different skin colors come from different cultures and will produce a culturally diverse educational environment. It is my belief that racial diversity does not equate to cultural diversity. I plan on writing a persuasive essay that persuades people that affirmative action is unconstitutional and unethical in college admissions and that the college admissions process need be reformed to not consider race as a factor of admissions. There is a lot of viewpoints on this topic and I feel it is a substantial base to write this paper on.