Romney and FEMA

In this article, writer Kevin Liptack analyzes Romney's viewpoint on FEMA. At the June 2011 debates, Romney stated that he wants the states to have control of FEMA. He thinks that the states should be in control of emergencies such as storms and other natural disasters. Romney thinks that with the states having control of FEMA, the federal government will avoid contributing more money to the deficit.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/29/romney-wants-more-responsibility-for-emergency-management-in-states/?hpt=po_c2

Precis 4

Precis #4

                        Todd Graham, director of the debate at Southern Illinois University, professes in his article “Debate coach: Obama, heat up; Romney, stay cool” from CNN.com, that Mitt Romney, Republican presidential nominee, performed better than Obama during the Presidential Debate on October 3, 2012. In fact, he claims “Romney was hungry, Obama was flat” (ibid.).

                        Graham implements a simile and two metaphors to bolster his point. He employs a simile as in his analysis of Obama’s poor performance. If Obama doesn’t stick to one theme, “Romney will be like Teflon, and nothing Obama says will stick to him in these debates”(ibid.). Graham’s purpose is to illustrate Obama’s failure to support his claims with evidence, and if this persists, Romney will surely win every debate to come. He utilizes a metaphor when describing why Obama did not perform well in the debate. The problem was not that Obama didn’t clearly present his theme, “[t]he problem was that the new premise lacked bite”(ibid.).  Obama’s ideas were stated clearly but his lack of empathy and passion made his argument fall flat. Lastly, Graham employs another metaphor to describe what Obama needs to do in order to succeed in the next debate. He should “utilize the backward-step-pivot-forward technique as often as possible;” in doing this, Obama can turn all of his potential flaws into strengths, ensuring him a possible win in the next debate.

            Todd Graham applies witty diction. Graham attacks Obama’s dispassionate and distant tone saying that “ it’s bad when…uber-wealthy Mitt Romney seems like he cares more about the middle class and even lower class than the sitting Democratic president”(ibid.). Obama’s lack of passion and emotion not only made his argument less appealing but it also made it less believable. Syntactically, Graham implements short, choppy sentences. “Check. Check. And check.” claims Graham IN WHAT CONTEXT????. The short, choppy sentences appeal to the analytical tone because proves the author’s point that the Republican candidate played to all his strengths while Mr. President showed nothing but his weaknesses.

            I agree with Todd Graham in that Obama did not perform to the best of his abilities. Obama fell flat and he was unable to support his claims and arguments against Romney while Romney attacked all of Obama’s arguments as well as supplemented his own. If Obama wishes to succeed in the next debate, he should listen to Graham’s advice about turning potential flaws into strengths. Romney’s approach should be the same; he should be aggressive, but not mean. If Obama and Romney follow Todd Graham’s advice, the next two debates are sure to be interesting as well as enlightening. 

Precis #3

            John Dickerson, writer for the slate.com, in his article “Dispatches From the Democratic National Convention”, declares that Michelle Obama’s speech at the Convention was reason enough for Obama to get re-elected. In fact,  he states  “Barack Obama has said that his biggest mistake in office is that he hasn’t told the right story to the American public…[m]aybe he should have let his wife tell it”(ibid.).

            Dickerson implements three rhetorical devices to prove his point. He utilizes cause and effect to show one of the reasons Obama should be re-elected. The First Lady states “[w]e were so young, so in love, and so in debt…[t]hat’s why Barack has fought so hard to increase student aid” so students don’t have to worry about enormous amounts of debt right after college(ibid.). Also, Dickerson employs personification stating Mrs. Obama “took a tour through those values instilled by this example—“dignity and decency,” “honesty and integrity,” “gratitude and humility.”(ibid.). Finally, Michelle Obama instills pathos in explaining why Obama is the best fit for the job; she states Barack deserves to be president because he “knows what it means when a family struggles” unlike his opponent Mitt Romney, who has never had to suffer(ibid.).

            John Dickerson utilizes passionate diction. He states that Michelle and Barack Obama “saw veterans, tributes to military families, and repeated references to their sacrifice.” Because Mr. and Mrs. President took the time to support America’s troops, Obama is more than deserving of their support; in fact, Elaine Brye, mother of four children on active duty states “[i] f someone is there for my family then I’ll be there for them”(ibid.).  Syntactically, Dickerson posits many  quotes from Michelle Obama such as “Barack knows what it means when a family struggles. He knows what it means to want something more for your kids and grandkids”(ibid.). The constant quotes from Michelle Obama reveal that Dickerson wants the reader to feel connected to the First Lady as well as it reveals his adamant support of the President. This contributes to his ebullient tone.

            I agree with John Dickerson in that Michelle Obama gave a great speech. The greatest element of her speech was that she made her husband more relatable to the American people. As stated before, she tells the American people “Barack knows what it means when a family struggles”(ibid.). She reminds the audience that the President had to struggle for most of his life, making him the perfect candidate to help America out of the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression. Michelle Obama’s speech not only makes her husband more relatable but also it proves why Barack Obama should be re-elected. Dickerson posits that “[a]t the GOP convention Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan said they would make hard choices. Michelle Obama’s argument was that her husband should be kept in office because he already has”(ibid.).

Precis #2

            Shannon Travis, eminent writer for CNN.com, in her article entitled “Is Obama taking the black vote for granted?,” declares that Obama can afford to take the black vote for granted. In fact, in opposition to those who think Obama can’t take the vote for granted, she states “that’s not entirely true”. Because Obama got ninety-five percent of the black vote in the two thousand eight elections, he can actually afford to take the black vote for granted.

            Travis utilizes three rhetorical devices to bolster her point. She employs logos when she describes why Obama can take the black vote for granted; “Obama won 95% of the black vote in 2008, and polls show he enjoys 87% support among black registered voters versus 5% for Republican rival Mitt Romney”(ibid.). Also she utilizes pathos as she describes Obama’s response to conservatives who stated “[u]nlike President Obama,[Romney] will not take any vote for granted”; Obama campaign spokeswoman Clo Ewing replied “President Obama does not take a single vote or support from any community for granted”(ibid.). To prove that Obama does not take any vote for granted, Travis lastly employs cause and effect. Hilary Shelton, NAACP Washington Bureau director, states “the president’s policies have greatly benefited African-Americans, such as health care reform…and protecting voting rights and civil rigths”(ibid.). With this last quote, Travis shows the things Obama did through his first term that allow him to take certain votes for granted.

            Shannon Travis employs sincere language. Although Obama was unable to attend the NAACP convention due to a so-called scheduling conflict, he rectifies the situation by releasing a statement saying he “really wanted to be with the NAACP because he recognizes that strong support that he has from this constituency”(Travis). Obama attempts to make up for his absence by reminding his African-American supporters how much their support and votes mean to him. Syntactically, Travis utilizes many quotes and m-dashes in her support of Obama. “I think the policies that he adopted--for better or for worse--they are very much policies that benefit African-Americans” says Sabato (ibid.). The quotes from other sources reveal her adamant support for Obama; in addition, the m-dashes reveal that Travis accepts the fact Obama is not perfect but that won’t stop him from trying to fulfill all the promises he has made to the American people, which contributes to her sympathetic tone.

            I agree with Shannon Travis believing that Obama can risk taking the black vote for granted. Although he shouldn’t, the overwhelming support from the African American community in the two thousand eight elections almost ensures him the same amount of support in the coming election. However, it is not the support Obama needs to worry about for “[Obama] doesn’t have to worry about losing votes to Mitt Romney. He has to worry about African-Americans not showing up in the record numbers that showed up in 2008,”states Sabato (ibid.). Obama needs not to concern himself with whether or not he will lose his most loyal supporters but more so with whether or not those supporters will actually show up to the polls.