Holiday Spirit

This cartoon says that consumerism has taken over Christmas, and it's been taken over for quite some time now. I agree. Unfortunately, stores and businesses bombard people with advertisements or anything else to get people to notice them and go buy things so the companies can make money. Even more unfortunate is how this actually works... for example, I was in the waiting room at the doctor's office a few days ago when Oprah came on TV and she did a special about "her favorite things." This was one of the most oddly selfish and attention-grabbing shows I've ever seen. It was amazing how people who you'd think would have no interest--who were reading a perfectly good magazine--turned up their eyes to watch as Oprah unveiled nice objects amidst the crowd of screaming middle-aged women. Oh and while we mention magazines, those Christmas ads in there....

Where is Purpose? Where is Truth? Where is Hope? Where is Love? Where is He?

Looking around at the store in which this cartoon is set, we see SALE signs and a television and a big ol' cash register and merchandise everywhere. The Grinch says something showing how he's changed himself and his view of Christmas--that he really gets it now. However, the lady at the register thinks naught of the real meaning of the quote but immediately wants to make a purchase of it; she not only offers to buy it, but in the image in the cartoon she is in fact already holding out her credit card. The man at the register is looking a little sick of the whole holiday already, but presumably glad to make a few bucks. Also, the woman is wearing a Rudolph sweater, further emphasizing the materialism: it's not just good enough to like something--you have to buy it too. She's carrying a number of presents... it wouldn't be Christmas without presents, if you go by what the world says. Christmas is a time when we buy things for other people and hope they buy us something really good too, according to the world. It's so sad that the baby Jesus and His Salvation is virtually nonexistent in the world's message. That is what this cartoon really says. It says that no one really knows what Christmas is about... and it shows in the buying, buying, buying. It shows in the presents and in the purchasing and in the cash flow.

The woman in this cartoon is sure enthused about Christmas alright, but with her materialistic spirit of colorful boxes and cute little sweatshirts, we see that she is missing the most important part.

scratch that.

the ONLY important part... everything else is just trivial!

The only way to get something of any sort of value is to buy it, right? The answer to this question is an absolute "no." Absolutely, the only thing of value came to us on Christmas a long time ago, but that gift is free.

Response to "Taylor's Death a Grim Reminder For Us All" by Jason Whitlock

Jason Whitlock argues that the real reasons for many deaths of black men are different than those most people see. He says that black men, unfortunately, are the almost exclusive cause of murder of black men. They do this to each other, Whitlock says, and bring the destruction upon themselves by the way they act, live, and think, and from the music (if you can even call it that) and other influences pouring violence and immaturity into their minds. Jason terms those blacks who use violence to keep other blacks in their place--because dey ain't "keepin' it real"--as the "Black KKK."
I agree with Whitlock. Numbers are hard to argue with. If black people are usually the ones killing black people, then black people are usually the ones killing black people... facts are facts. As sad as it is, it's true. Jason goes on and gives reasons why this is the case, as well as a general, blanket solution (in its basic form): stop letting in bad influences, and start accepting things that improve your future. This advice cannot sensibly be denied, and this is why the culture of many black youths (and many whites as well) is so brainless. They are given the opportunity to break away from the degradation in a few different forms and places. Not enough take that option.

An excellent use of parallelism comes to us is this sentence: "There's only one group of people who can change the rotten, anti-education, pro-violence culture our kids have adopted." This stresses the importance--equal importance--of these three qualities (anti-qualities, really). It clarifies the sentence so we can more easily see just how horrible and degrading the culture is. The article is about the very negatives of black youth culture and what it causes, and how black men are the essential cause of the evil of it, since it comes from within them. Whitlock also makes a call to action to change things. By using parallelism in this sentence for that point, the article is strengthened by making the negatives clear, so that when he calls for the positives, there may be no mistaking what's right and what's wrong.

Response to "School Dance Steps Look Like Foreplay"

Betsy Hart says that high school dancing looks more like foreplay than actual dancing. she explains grinding, and how this way of dancing is disrespectful and way over the line. Many parents, including the principal of the mentioned school, agree that this dancing is uncalled for and ludicrous and should not be allowed. Other parents make known that they feel the kids should be allowed to dance like that because it's cool and fun, and why ruin the kids' special night? Hart explains that this is bad parenting; the role of parent is not to be buddies with your children, but to be a role model and guide.
I agree. High school dances should not be some mass sexual arousal event. That's just weird. And decadent. C'mon guys! Honestly! Disrespect and immorality are simply disrespect and immorality no matter how you feel about it. Can we not abstain from this distaste and degradation in the presence of our classmates and teachers/parents (we'll toss the DJ in there too)? That's pretty rude. (Of course, as always, while having friends around, you gotta be cool right? So I'm thinking that maybe kids aren't so concerned with the rudeness of grinding in front of friends.) High schoolers do not have the self control that they always say or think they do. How many teens have had sex before marriage? Too many. What a shame to be slaves to our fleeting desires and dance inappropriately just because it 'feels good.' There's so much more to having fun than that. A lot of kids just don't know how to have good fun, and parents don't know how to stop it. Betsy Hart used the rhetorical question "Because they want their kids to 'like' them?" to get the reader thinking about how parents raise their kids not only according to the principle of being a model and guide but also to that of being their kid's buddy. Since her article is largely about parents' reaction to kids' misbehavior, addressing the question specifically about parents becomes effective. Hart uses this to try to hit home with some people, because for a parent to think about that question would require that they examine themselves a little deeper than just hearing a statement. It gets people to think about how they are raising their kids to behave.

You can view the article here.

Response to "Laureen Stiller Rikleen: How do we spell relief: I-m-u-s"

Why should anyone really have to be punished harshly for saying something like that? Sure, it's wrong, but he apologized and was off the air for six months! This is America, and we have a little something we like to call the First Amendment, which pretty much means that anyone is free to say almost anything (as long as they say 'sorry' if they said something bad). Plus, he's good at what he does, so we pretty much have to welcome him back!

Wait.....what??

Let's hop over to reality... Don Imus said something uncalled for. If only people would just cease to reward those comments with coverage and attention. If only people would just turn their radios/TVs off when they see or hear their fellow human beings being degraded and disrespected. Sadly, however, human nature dictates often against good moral. Because of this, people do need to be taken off the air and reprimanded, and--in some cases--not let back on to malign others.

...huh.... Well, so I'm saying that everyone who says or does anything bad should simply be removed? Not exactly: this is, after all, the United States, where we (most of us) pledge liberty and justice for all. Looking at that phrase a little more critically & curiously, I begin to think perhaps that liberty requires justice to guide it--to control it. Without justice, liberty--like the liberty taken by Don Imus & others to say what they say, as well as other little liberties we all take that maybe we shouldn't--would not even be understood; the idea itself would be senseless. In the same way, how much would justice have to justify if no liberty was ever taken?

I agree with Laureen Stiller Rikleen in the belief that it's good that Don Imus is being let back on the air, but for different reasons. I believe he should be let back on ONLY because of the collective principles of Americans, the principle of the liberty to say what one wants to say.

Nevertheless, quite frankly, it is my hope that he returns and that very few people tune in to him because they take the liberty to listen to something better.

But will that happened? Probably not.

So... How do we spell relief? Good question.

Rikleen effectively uses comparisons when she discusses other Don Imus-y examples like Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Isaiah Thomas, or Rush Limbaugh. This is the best example she uses. She says that Imus alone faced as much persecution as he did... fair persecution , yes, but still--no one else got in trouble like he did. By drawing on this comparison that these other people weren't as punished, Rikleen makes a good point and gets the readers to think a little harder about what she's talking about.

For article, click here.