Stage Six

In the Normalcy Not Nostrums blog, the author argued that standardized testing was detrimental to students’ education. I agree that having teachers cram students so that they pass a test contradicts the value of learning. Having schools’ budgets determined by the test scores also creates a rather negative learning environment. I find that the STAAR test and other state standardizing tests encourage students to pick the right answer and write a correctly organized essay; such tests encourage students to think inside the box instead of promoting creativity. After all, the point of education is for students to grow up into intelligent, creative adults, not detail oriented robots.

The author, however, could have utilized statistics or polls to demonstrate the consequences of standardized testing. Data comparing students who received an education geared toward standardized testing versus students who are simply taught by their teacher at their own pace could provide concrete evidence of the unproductive nature of standardized testing. Because numbers are objective, they would be the most effective way to build a rock bottom foundation to the argument. Likewise, quotes from experts in education about the harmful effect of standardized testing could bolster the author’s claim. Overall, the article is well written and sheds light on a major part of the public school system.

#Notmypresident

President Trump is the leader of the United States. He is also a frequent twitter user and says unbelievable statements. His hair, his predilection for making up words (“yuge”), and his orange skin have led to his stardom on instagram memes. However, we would be fools to neglect his serious actions and focus on his entertainment factor. It’s obvious that Trump has appointed unsuitable individuals to his cabinet that will be detrimental to our nation not just during the Trump presidency but also to years that follow. Starting from now, we must be vigilant in making sure that the White House does not pass any laws or acts that will damage our quality of life.

The most alarming appointment may very well be Betsy DeVos, secretary of education. As an individual with much more experience with the private school system that public schools, she has expressed disdain for public education in favor of a charter school system. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 50.4 million Americans attended public school in 2016. For now and for many years to come, the majority of the American population will for some part receive and benefit from public education. Therefore, an individual who supports and has experience with the public school system could change our nation for the better.

Vice President Mike Pence is also a figure that turned heads so far this year. From calling his wife “mother” to harboring anti-gay beliefs, Pence does not represent the ideas and beliefs of many Americans. Yet, some individuals are hoping for a President Pence. No matter how flamboyant and ludicrous Trump may seem, allowing Pence to serve as leader could spell trouble. Americans should not settle with a leader who assumed power without much credibility, foundation, or people’s support.

Ultimately, there are many more members of the cabinet deserving scrutiny. Nevertheless, Americans must ensure that the decisions of the White House does not negatively impact the nation.

In “Health Care Is Still in Danger”, Paul Krugman warns against the danger of neglecting the issue of health care. Although the media focuses on controversial matters concerning Trump and Russia, Krugman advocates Americans to pay close attention to the Senate in order to ensure that a bill or act does not harm our health care system. As a regular columnist of the New York Times newspaper, Krugman, by default, has credibility due to his many years as an op-ed writer as well as his countless awards, including the Nobel Memorial Prize. His audience, which is the American public, will find themselves nodding their heads in agreement to Krugman’s argument because Krugman provides an efficacious balance of evidence, logic, and strong remarks.

Krugman builds a solid foundation to his argument through concrete evidence as well as sound reasoning. He warns Americans that if we remain oblivious to the Senate’s actions, the White House’s “effort to deprive millions of health care” will succeed. He references last March when the Affordable Care Act was on the path of being repealed until the “devastating assessment” of “23 million more uninsured Americans” dominated the media. In that case, however, “intense media scrutiny” sparked Americans to take action against the repeal. By juxtapositioning the situation in March to the current Senate’s attempts to repeal the current healthcare system, Krugman underscores the main difference between the two cases: media scrutiny. Because the media is focused on other flashy issues, Krugman is able to demonstrate the need for Americans to take matters into their own hands instead of allowing the media to dictate their opinions and their morals. He also adds that should the Senate successfully replace the healthcare system, “an extra 22 million” will be uninsured. The number is significant to readers because numbers are objective. Krugman, knowing the power in numbers, is able to solidify his argument and leave Americans without doubt of the importance of protesting the Senate’s actions.

In addition, Krugman provides hyperlinks so that his readers understand that all his claims are based on solid fact. One such hyperlink provides a timeline of the American Care Act repeal and replacement so that Americans can have a better understanding and thus realize the truth within his argument. He also provides a graph of Health Insurance Coverage of the Nonelderly to stress the importance of affordable healthcare for a significant number of Americans. Furthermore, Krugman takes advantage of strong diction to portray the harmful nature of repealing the current healthcare system. He claims that in the Senate there are “House leaders bullied and bribed enough holdouts.”

Krugman’s editorial is well written and his argument appears to have few to no flaws. Ultimately, it’s due to a blend of proof and reasoning that Americans are pulled into and convinced by Paul Krugman.

In “Trump is His Own Worst Enemy”, Charles M. Blow argues that President Trump’s seeming lack of wit will prevent Trump from executing his controversial proposals, such as the building of the wall. As an op-ed columnist of the reputable New York Times newspaper, Blow certainly has credibility as a qualified editorial writer on politics. His audience, which is mainly the American public (particularly democrats), will find themselves nodding their heads in agreement due to Blow’s sound reasoning.

Blow is blunt in his descriptions of Trump’s ineptitude. Through mocking statements such as referring to Trump’s “gnat-like attention span”, he illustrates Trump as an individual who lacks the intelligence and dedication expected of a president. However, Blow backs up such remarks by providing evidence such as Trump’s quote “I think he’s going to respect your president if I’m elected and I hope he likes me.” By including Trump’s quote on being shocked when Russian President Vladimir Putin referred to former President Obama as the N-word followed up by revealing Trump’s desire that Putin will “like” him, Blow effectively conveys Trump’s questionable morals. He also references Joshua Green, author of Devil’s Bargain. Because Green’s book delves into the inside story of Trump’s election, his claims are backed with credibility. In an appeal to authority, Blow quotes Green’s assertion that the idea of building a wall is “one of Trump’s greatest hits but it wasn’t Trump’s idea”. Thus, Blow underscores how Trump lacks the most important quality of a leader: the ability to think for himself and for his people.

Blow’s editorial is refreshing and can be considered as humorous due to the numerous ridiculing statements. However, the editorial could be strengthened with more statistics from reliable databases. Numbers are appealing to readers because they are objective, after all. Although Blow does use credible evidence, he could build a more concrete foundation for his argument by adding more evidence, such as statistics from polls.

Paul Krugman of the New York Times posted an editorial titled Republicans Leap Into the Awful Unknown. In the article, Krugman argues that the Congressional Budget Office’s criticism of the Republican healthcare plans is valid. He points out flaws and undeniable lies of the Trump administration, citing Pence’s assertion on Medicaid. By underscoring how American Academy of Actuaries along with the American Medical Association agree with the C.B.O.’s disagreement with Trump’s plans for healthcare, Krugman shows how official organizations support the C.B.O.’s view. Although the administration claims to be making health care cheaper and available to more people, Kruger disputes that the exact opposite is becoming the reality.

I would recommend this article because Krugman effectively shows the faults of the White House’s health care plan. Health care is essential for Americans; therefore, we have the duty to ensure that our health care is founded on a system that benefits the most people.

Hello

Hello