GREEN: A Bitter Pill
7 views | +0 today
Follow
GREEN: A Bitter Pill
A court in Washington is poised to decide whether pharmacists should be forced to violate their religious beliefs at the command of the state or go out of business.
Curated by Erin Webster
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Erin Webster
Scoop.it!

Editorial: No more special favors, privileges for politicians - Chicago Sun-Times

Editorial: No more special favors, privileges for politicians - Chicago Sun-Times | GREEN: A Bitter Pill | Scoop.it

1. The basic subject of this column is that politicians beneath the rank of governor or mayor should not have so many special privileges.

 

2. The writer tells that senators are allowed to give scholarship funds to any two colleges of their choice (but mainly give to supporters), use county "slush funds" for their own benefit without accountability, and have unnecessary bodyguards and police to escort them wherever they go.

 

3. The writer thinks that minor politicians shouldn't have such special privileges.

 

4. "It’s time we brought them [the minor politicians] down to Earth."

 

6. The columnist doesn't support the idea that minor politicians should recieve special privileges that will only end up abused or wasted.

 

7. This article was written for a reader that is interested in the affairs of special rights given to politicians and whether it is right for them to possess theses rights.

 

8. Yes; the writer gives convincing evidence as to the unneccessary privileges lavished upon minor politicians and how it would be better if we expended the resources mainly used on them to benefit everyone.

 

In the article "No more special favors, privileges for politicians", the author, Mark Hornung, utilizes many rhetorical strategies throughout the article to convince the reader of his point that minor politicians should not receive any special treatment, perks, or privileges on account of their slightly lofty and influential positions. He uses heavy criticism and sarcasm to influence the reader to believe that just because of a good job position, politicians have no need for bodyguards or slush funds or other perks of that nature. He also uses arguments from both sides of this story's spectrum; he knows how politicians receive and abuse their unneccessary privileges and wishes them to stop.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Erin Webster
Scoop.it!

Our unrealistic attitudes about death, through a doctor’s eyes

Our unrealistic attitudes about death, through a doctor’s eyes | GREEN: A Bitter Pill | Scoop.it
When medical care amounts to torture....

 

1.The basic subject of the column is the argument between the morality of pushing elderly people close to death into taking more medication and having more surgeries vs. letting them go.

 

2. The life expectancy went from 45 in the year 1900 to 78 in 2007.

    Family members that wish their elderly-and-near-departing to continue their struggle may be the ones that are taking the impending reality the hardest.

     The capabilities of modern medicine are often overestimated.

 

3. The writer thinks that people should consider letting their elderly family member go so they don't have to suffer rather than pushing them to keep taking medication and going to medical lengths for life.

 

4. With unrealistic expectations of our ability to prolong life, with death as an unfamiliar and unnatural event, and without a realistic, tactile sense of how much a worn-out elderly patient is suffering, it’s easy for patients and families to keep insisting on more tests, more medications, more procedures.

 

6. From this article, I learned that the columnist believes in letting go of elderly patients whose prolonged lives are full of pain.

 

7. This article was written for an elderly patient or their family in hopes that they would weigh both sides of the issue that is medication for prolonged elderly life.

 

8.  Yes; he offers views and conflicting ideas from either side of the spectrum of this issue and gives ideas even from the patients' viewpoint.

 

2. The author of the article “Our unrealistic attitudes about death, through a doctor’s eyes”, Craig Bowron, incorporates several rhetorical devices and strategies in his article to accomplish the purpose of persuading the reader to consider letting their near and dear elderly patient go so they don’t have to live their unnecessarily longer life in constant pain. He expresses sympathy with the patients, saying “the potential complications of any therapy are often large and the benefits small.” He believes that the patients as well as their families should carefully consider whether or not to attempt extension of a life such as Bowron’s own patient, who had “heart failure, weak kidneys, anemia, Parkinson’s and mild dementia”, and whose appetite has begun to fail, whose joints have caused him to fall more often, and whose body threatens a stroke at any time. Should he really be put on any more medication to continue living in that manner? Bowron believes that in cases such as this, it may be time to just let go.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Erin Webster
Scoop.it!

A bitter pill - Washington Times

A bitter pill - Washington Times | GREEN: A Bitter Pill | Scoop.it

A court in Washington is poised to decide whether pharmacists should be forced to violate their religious beliefs at the command of the state or go out of business.

 

1. A Washington court wants to either make pharmacists with religious conviction provide "morning-after" pills such as Plan B and ella to their customers instead of referring the customer to their life-taking drugs elsewhere, or let their business fail because of their belief.

 

2.

  >Many pharmacists that are bothered by or against the use of emergency abortifacients and do not stock or dispense them are normally allowed to refer customers that want the drugs elsewhere.

  >As of present, the government allows these referrals for the sole purpose of economic benefit and not because of their disapproval of the drugs themselves.

  >Only 2% of Washington pharmacies report that their lack of these drugs existed because of religious or convictious beliefs.

 

3. The writer is hoping that the court will choose to continue the referral option in family pharmacies that wish not to dispense emergency abortifacients.

 

4."Hopefully, Judge Ronald Leighton will rule in favor of the family pharmacists in accordance with our national identity and not agenda-driven social-engineering bullies like Gov. Gregoire."

 

6. The columnist supports the pharmacists who do not wish to provide anyone with emergency abortifacients.

 

7. This article was written for readers that are concerned with the growing pro-life v. pro-choice struggle.

 

8. I agree with the writer; she offers unbiased information from both spectrums of the story while seperately stating her own opinion.

 

9. MLA format:

Green, Anneke. "A bitter pill." Washington Post. 3 Feb. 2012.

 

*Note: There was no available underline option for my MLA format above. I know that "Washington Post" should be underlined.

 

2.  The writer of this article, Anneke Green, used many rhetorical methods and strategies to convey her own views on her topic, some more subtle than others. The main theme of this article is “Offering a choice is a choice in itself.” Anneke Green made it obvious that she is outraged by the wish of some officials to force all pharmacists, despite their beliefs, to stock, supply, and dispense emergency abortifacients to customers that ask for the drugs. This is shown when she said that she hopes “Judge Ronald Leighton will rule in favor of the family pharmacists in accordance with our national identity and not agenda-driven social-engineering bullies like Gov. Gregoire” (Green, P6). She explains the reasoning behind the government’s willingness to provide pharmacists with a choice of whether or not to provide the drugs by explaining that “Washington State allows pharmacies to refer patients elsewhere for a wide variety of business and economic reasons, but not for reasons of conscience” (Green, P3).

 

 

  

 

 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Erin Webster
Scoop.it!

Gulf War III isn’t an option

Gulf War III isn’t an option | GREEN: A Bitter Pill | Scoop.it
Attacking Iran would not be a wise move.

1. The basic subject of the column is that even if they prove able to produce a nuclear bomb, it would be unwise on theirs or our part to attack anyone for fear of another Gulf War III.

 

2. Iran does not yet have the ability to build a nuclear weapon.

    Covert operations believed to have been carried out by Israeli intelligence agents, perhaps with U.S. assistance, have significantly slowed Iran’s progress toward being able to make a bomb.

     The Iranian government acts in ways that are inimical to the interests of Israel, the United States, our Western allies and the Arab states of the Persian Gulf.

 

3. The writer believes it unwise to attack Iran should they make a bomb.

 

4. "Are you ready for Gulf War III? If not, the only choice is to continue with diplomacy and sanctions. They aren’t great options, but they’re the best we’ve got."

 

6. The columnist recognizes the possibility of a bomb in the making in Iran, but doubts their action behind it.

 

7. This article was written for a reader that is interested in foreign affairs.

 

8. Yes; I agree with the author because he gives evidence from all possible situations.

 

2. The author of the article "Gulf War III isn't an option", Eugene Robinson, employs many rhetorical strategies to accomplish the purpose of convincing the reader to agree with his premise that attacks on or from the country of Iran for their unlikely bomb making/bomb using would be unwise on anyone’s part, automatically causing another Gulf War and, consequently, another United States win. Robinson uses common evidence from both countries’ tendencies and likelihoods, stating that “it is clear that Iran does not yet have the ability to build a nuclear weapon,” and it must be considered that “it does not act in ways that are inherently irrational.” Eugene Robinson used his knowledge to convince his readers that the likelihood of the use of an Iranian bomb is slim.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Erin Webster
Scoop.it!

Obama’s lucky break

Obama’s lucky break | GREEN: A Bitter Pill | Scoop.it

Things are looking good for the president.

 

1.The basic subject of this column is that President Obama is doing absolutely nothing and yet watching his own chances of reelection rise in a lucky spell.

 

2.   The writer tells that President Obama is fifteen points ahead of Newt Gingrich and nine points ahead of Mitt Romney.

      President Obama is watching his poll numbers rise as the national unemployment has dropped consistently for five months in a row.

      The President is enjoying events such as the White House Science Fair and meeting with Super Bowl winners and not bothering with his campaign.

 

3.The writer doesn’t agree with President Obama’s premise, but thinks that the President is incredibly lucky on account of the favorable circumstances surrounding him at such an ideal time.

 

4.“Obama suddenly seems to be enjoying himself quite a bit, and no wonder: He just might be the luckiest man alive.”

 

5.The columnist is unbiased toward President Obama himself. He doesn’t necessarily agree with him, but that doesn’t stop him from reporting both sides of the situation which states that the President is incredibly lucky for his current campaign success despite his lack of work on it.

 

6.This article was written for a reader that is curious to know about the current state of President Obama’s campaign.

 

7.Yes; the writer offers the current campaign percentages, the shrinking state of the unemployment rate, and the President’s according actions.

 

8.Milbank, Dana. “Obama’s Lucky Break.” The Washington Post. 9 Feb. 2012.

 

 

Dana Milbank employs many rhetorical strategies in this article, “Obama’s Lucky Break”, through use of knowledge of President Obama’s campaign in its current state, unbiased reporting on the goings-on in the White House in the midst of campaigning, the state of the national unemployment rate, and the knowledge of the state of the Republican GOP campaigns in relation to each other. Milbank includes all of these rhetorical strategies in order to sway readers into agreement with his premise, and to inform readers of this situation with his occasional input of opinion. What is good about this article is that there is no mudslinging going on from Milbank; he casually states his disagreement with certain aspects of President Obama’s presidential efficiency, but doesn’t let that lead into a rage, instead stating viewpoints given by different sources and current facts relating to the contributions given to President Obama’s continuing fortunate streak during this time.

more...
No comment yet.