Colbert's Brilliant Response to Mrs. Trump's Alleged Plagiarism

This past July, Melania Trump was largely denunciated for plagiarizing parts of her speech at last year’s Republican National Convention straight from one of Michelle Obama’s from 2008. Never one to miss an opportunity to poke fun at a politically charged situation, Stephen Colbert and his team of writers wasted no time putting together a skit to perform on his show the night after this controversy took place.

Played by a strikingly similar looking actress, Stephen gave 'Melania' a chance to publicly defend herself against the allegations of plagiarism she had received. Tony Award-winning actress Laura Benanti perfectly captured Melania’s squinted eyes and perpetual pouty expression, even throwing in a few expertly executed model turns. Wearing her hair and outfit in a way that was made to mimic what Trump wore on stage in Cleveland that summer, Benanti began,

“My fellow Americans, this is truly the best of times, it is the worst of times. I did not plagiarize my speech last night, I would never do such a thing. I would not, could not with a goat. I would not, could not on a boat. That is because I learned honesty during my humble upbringing, in West Philadelphia born and raised. Thank you. On the playground is where I spent most of my days. So to those who say I stole my speech, I say give me a break. Give me a break. Break me off a piece of that Kit Kat bar.”

Stealing from everyone from Charles Dickens to “The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air” to a Kit Kat commercial, in making her point, her denial of any plagiarism consists only of long strings of plagiarized phrases.

America: The land of the free and the home of the screwed

  America is a country founded over 300 years ago. In these 300 years our country has risen to the fore front of the world, but as of late our country has been crushed by bad presidents, rising debt, wars we cannot afford, rising unemployment rate.

During the last eight years Obama has been president the unemployment rate and debt has substantially risen. In the year 2008 Barack Obama was sworn in as the first African american president. Instead of leading what should've been a beaker of hope and new era for African american people. He has helped the economy crumble. After Obama's first term the unemployment rate was 7.9%. This means that 7.9% of people in our country did not have a job. In addition to this the american government is under 19 trillion dollars of debt. Since Obama has been president the debt has risen over 9 trillion dollars with no signs of slowing down. About roughly 6 trillion of this money was spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan war. A war that our president promised to end but has not. The Iraq and Afghanistan war has claimed the life of 5,000 soldiers and wounded over 1 million of them. During the presidency Barack Obama has wreaked havoc on the united states of america and ways that even our next president cannot fix.
If the country continues to be run by bad leaders such as Barack Obama, america’s future will be a very dim one. This country needs a stronger leader that can rise to the challenge of fixing Barack Obama's mistakes. A president that will lower the debt, bring more jobs to america and end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Huck or Tom?

In the passage we read today in class and after asking a few of my teachers the pin falls in the middle for if the this is The United States of Huck and The United States of Tom. Both of the traits talked about with both  sides show up in many topics including politics and daily life. Donald Trump is a good example to start with. He himself leans more towards being a part of The United States of Tom due to him saying, "I started with a small loan of 1 million dollars." He himself is running for President as we all know, but he is doing it by being a demagogue. In the passage it says, "All my life I have busted my butt to get where I am, so don't come crying to me."(203). Donald Trump uses a phrase just like that to get down to a level of, I started on the bottom like everyone. Him being a demagogue helps him with Presidency and he is also leading The United States of Tom theory.

On the other hand, many people fall into The United States of Huck theory. Many people including my Advanced Algebra teacher, Mr. Weisman, believe America it's self is a country that has "fair play" and is "spreading the truck around."(203). Barack Obama is a great example of someone who is helping lead The United States of Huck. He is a man that cares for the nation and hopes to make it better than it was before. As a great leader, He has made many strides to make The United States and safe and welcoming environment for all. He also loves the people and does many things for the people making him a democratic leader.

In the end both of them end up clashing heads and there can't exactly be a winner within all this. Both are leading a separate "nation" and clearly clash heads many times. Also while Trump thinks he "knows" everything just like the Tom theory, Obama "hopes" that he is doing the right thing for the nation.

Obama's State of the Union Speech

Obama gave an incredible State of the Union Speech. I am not one for politics just because I don't really understand it, and that's what I was expecting when I began watching his speech. But that isn't what I got. Obama gave a speech that really had nothing to do with politics, and was very interesting. He made it very easy to listen to, and somewhat enjoyable. Maybe some of this is due to the rhetoric he used.

One thing I noticed that Obama did quite often was repetition in his sentences. When he would begin to finish a point he was talking about, he would wrap it up with repetition. In two cases, I saw this to be true. He would say "Or will we..." and also "I believe..." These were used so effectively that I even found myself agreeing with whatever he was saying. It was a very powerful rhetorical device.

Another rhetorical device he used was logos. Logos is one of the most persuasive device. If someone isn't convinced by feeling, the have to be convinced by the numbers. President Obama's use of logos included talking about the increase in jobs across the nation. Obama said over eleven millions jobs have been created, and America's economy is the best its been since 1999. By saying these little facts, as an American, I feel that something we are doing as a nation has been working.

Obama used repetition and logos, but in my opinion, the most moving device he used was pathos. When Obama introduced Rebecca and her husband, I immediately knew what he was going for. He gave us insight in the struggles they went through, which gave us a sense of sadness, but then he hit us with their success story, which gave us a sense of pride. Obama even said that Rebecca and her family wasn't alone, and that most of America is Rebecca and her family. It was a very personal thing to consider myself similar to Rebecca. Obama made us feel that what he has been doing for our Union was the best that could be done, and I believed it.

Rhetoric in the Obama's SOTU Address

      In Obama’s State of the Union Address, he talks of both the hardships and successes that America has recently experienced, as well as its strong unity and potential for success in the future. Through Obama’s rhetorical personalization and assertion of community, as well as his pathetic appeal and support to the wants and popular beliefs of his nation, Obama stresses his want for government reformation, persuading America to put his plan to action for a more prosperous future nation.

Syntax:
--Obama has many pauses throughout his speech.
     --The pauses are climatic and create emphasis, making Obama appear powerful.
--Obama constructs his sentences by starting with “we can’t.”
     --This structure puts the negatives out in the open first.
     --When Obama then states what “we must” do, it seems like the perfect
        solution compared to the preceding “we can’t” statement,
        persuading his wants/plan.

Diction:
--Obama uses words such as “we” and “us.”
     --This personalizes himself with America and creates an appealing sense of community,
        gaining support for his plan.

--Obama inserts superfluous yet powerful words such as “any” and “every.”
     --Creates emphasis and shows Obama is not exclusive.

Logos:
--Obama states many facts and statistics.
     --Many of the statistics are of positive successes that the United States has had.
     --This makes the audience associate these positive successes with Obama,
        persuading the audience to believe that Obama is responsible for them,
        creating appeal.

Ethos:
--Through Obama’s stating of positive statistics, he is creating a trustworthy and
     knowledgable image to the audience.

--Obama uses informal diction and has numerous humorous insertions.
     --This makes Obama appear to be like and almost equal to the “normal American.”
--Obama wears a suit and dresses formally.
     --This, obviously, creates a professional image and a high reputation for America.

Pathos:
--At one point, Obama intently attacks the government.
     --This is appealing to the public because it is what the public constantly does,
        making Obama appear like he supports the public’s beliefs.

--Obama states the many challenges that Americans must face.
     --This shows that Obama truly cares for the public and understands what they
        are going through, pathetically appealing to the audience.

--Obama also stresses the need for safety against terrorists.
     --This appeals to the audience's sense of security and makes Obama appear to be
        a protector and a hero on behalf of Americans.

Obama's SOTU Outline

To be a politician, you don't really need education, you just need to be good at talking to people and persuading them of something. You need to evict emotion and make someone want to vote for you, or at the very least support you. Barack Obama is very educated, as were most presidents, but one of the most important things is talking-- look what George W. Bush was able to do with Iraq. 

Though I don't know the name for it, Obama used a strategy that he's used in the past to say: "Hey. Look. I'm making a difference in the lives of American people." He told a story about Rebekah and Ben from Minneapolis, who just wanted to live the American Dream. I don't even remember what the story was trying to prove-- but it makes one feel very 'ra ra ra' about Obama and America. That's why it works.

Obama also did some impromptu ethos (though it may have been thought-out.) He said that he has no more campaigns to run (normal ethos,) and then some people started clapping. That's funny itself, and instead of just laughing with them, he said: "I know, because I won both of them!" Quite good ethos. And funny too.

Something else that every president since Reagan in the 83' state of the union, Obama invited someone to honor. He invtied Alan Gross and called him out. Another time I don't know the name of the device, but it's rhetoric none the less.

Hide the Problems, Fix Them Quietly

In the wake of new allegations regarding the Secret Service, a security force that protects the president, a greater issue, concerning government releases of potentially dangerous information, is emerging. Because of whistle-blowers and watchdog government groups, and investigative reporting, much of the edge that the Secret Service and other government agencies have on criminals has diminished or disappeared. Criminals now have access to all of the documents detailing the Secret Service member's locations, weapons, strategies, and responsibilities. It is unnecessary to reveal the exact details of a security breach, and the new security program to the public.

The most recent allegations concern a man who jumped over the White House fence, entered the building, and ran through two rooms in the White House with a knife, before being apprehended. With this reveal came other stories, one about a contractor with a criminal record, who stood just inches form President Obama in an elevator, and another blunder in the response to a series of gun shots fired at the White House three years ago.

While it is important to have whistle-blowers and watchful citizens that make sure that the security forces of the United States are acting in a proper manner, and respecting the privacy and security of individuals, exposing flaws in the protocols publicly poses a danger to the safety of public officials and members of the security teams.

To those who are not interested in unlawfully entering the White House, fighting with a guard, and then being arrested, the detailed story about the intruder only serves as a shock. The average citizen has no power to change the way that the Secret Service operates, and cannot gain anything useful from detailed reveals of government security programs. Yes, it is frightening that the White House does not lock the front door, but scaring the public does not fix the problem.

Even if there was a positive side to the public reveals, the possible negative effects far outweigh the benefits. Using the information about the flaws in the security system, a terrorist could easily exploit the Secret Service's declared weaknesses. The only people that should have a full understanding of the flaws and capabilities of the Secret Service are agents of the Secret Service and public officials in Washington.

The ongoing public hearing in Congress has revealed past mistakes and current problems with the Secret Service to the world, describing exactly how to circumvent the President's protection. The hearing should be done behind closed doors, and the evidence and security review should be done privately. Unless the threat concerns the public's safety, there is no reason to reveal it to the world.

The United States has a responsibility to promote vigilance in its citizenry, and the citizens have a right to demand information when it does not jeopardize national security. In recent years, pressure has been mounting on the government to increase "transparency" and release  classified documents. This principle exposes problems with governmental policies, budget waste, corruption, and illegal surveillance to the public, putting pressure on public officials to make changes. However, in the digital age that we live in today, these public reveals can threaten the safety of our public officials, and the safety of the nation.

Land Mines Ahead, Tread Lightly

The United States of America is getting closer to eliminating the use of land mines in war. While land mines can be very helpful in disposing of the enemy, they pose a large threat to the civilian population of whichever country is plagued by war.

 Long after a war is over, the ground in which the war is fought is often left covered with land mines. This is a great danger to all animals or civilians that have the unfortunate luck to discover a land mine by placing their foot on top of it.

The United States of America was one out a small group of countries that did not sign a treaty in 1997, which banned the use of land mines. This week, the Obama Administration agreed to destroy most of the United States' three million stockpiled land mines. This agreement supplemented a white house decision earlier this year to halt production and acquiring of land mines.

The land mine is a helpful tool during the war but after the war they become a major hazard to civilian population. The action that the Obama administration has taken to eliminate this threat to civilian life is excellent, but the action itself has come to late. In the time between 1997 and the present, the situation in the middle east has escalated dramatically and it is impossible to determine the extent to which land mines have devastated the populations of these countries.

All in all, it is should come as a relief that American land mines will no longer threaten the lives of civilians.

War...What Is It Good For

The U.S. has made great progress in it’s fight against terrorism. Or has it? On September 1, 2024 terrorist group Al Qaeda hijacked commercial airplanes crashing them into New York’s World Trade Center and the Pentagon, killing thousands of Americans. Shortly thereafter, many Americans wanted revenge. The U.S. suspected Iraq and Afghanistan of supporting Al Qaeda extremists and quickly became involved in wars in both countries. However there were some Americans who disagreed with these actions. California Congresswoman Barbara Lee did not think that going to war would resolve the conflict, displayed in the quote: “I am convinced that military action will not prevent further acts of international terrorism against the United States.” Still George Bush convinced the country to go to war. The result was the death of over 4,000 American soldiers and a cost to the U.S estimated at over 3 trillion dollars. Now that the U.S has withdrawn from the area, both Iraq and Afghanistan are still unstable and threatened by extremists.

Winston Churchill once said, “Those who fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.” Today a new advanced group of Islamic extremists has arisen called ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria). The group’s leaders are former members of Al Qaeda and are even now being called Al Qaeda extremists. Their actions are considered brutal and horrific and their latest attack involved the video taped beheading of British aid worker David Hains. During the video ISIS threatened the life of another hostage, and said that “This was a direct message to the allies of America.” Just as in the 2002 attacks, these terrorists are demanding the attention of our nation and our allies and they are getting it. During the most recent presidential address, Obama was careful to define the actions of the U.S. against ISIS as defensive. Although the U.S. has made hundreds of successful airstrikes against ISIS targets, Obama insisted that the U.S. would not engage in another land war in the Middle East. Still there are those who argue that the U.S. and it’s allies must annihilate ISIS as soon as possible.

It is true, ISIS must be stopped. WIth each day ISIS becomes more and more powerful. However it is possible for the U.S. to get involved without entering another devastating war. As President Obama urged in his address, the middle eastern countries threatened by ISIS need to take the lead. America should only give them the help they need. This type of help could include airstrikes, supply of weaponry, and tactical support. If history has taught us anything, it is that war will not prevent further acts of international terrorism. When the U.S. killed Osama Bin Laden it did not demolish Al Qaeda. Instead it pissed off the remaining members and caused even more animosity against the U.S. By taking extreme action the U.S has made itself more of a target of the Islamic extremists than it was before the wars.

War with Chicago (Op-Ed)

Last week, Obama declared war on Syria to stop an organization called ISIS. He has decided to send air strikes on ISIS in order to stop them from violently killing Americans and citizens of Syria. Some may be thinking, 'Good, we need to step in and show them that no one messes with America,' but we should be thinking 'Why are we going to war?' With all the violence going on in our own country, we shouldn't even be thinking about fighting a war overseas. We should be thinking about fighting a war right here, in Chicago.

Obama wants to save others, but in order to save others, we must save ourselves first. The amount of violence in Chicago has increased substantially since last year. The murder rate in Chicago is 4 times larger than in New York and 2.5 times higher than Los Angeles. Since October 18th, there have been 419 homicides in Chicago. In the year of 2013, there was a TOTAL of 454 homicides, in which 374 people were killed by guns. The average age of people murdered were between 18 and 24 years old. This average age is also known as the common age of gang members in Chicago. If I were to turn on WGN News at Nine, I would immediately see a story about a young kid being murdered or shot and wounded in Chicago. Not only would I hear about it happening in Chicago, but also in my own town. This past summer a family, who lives near me, was robbed at gunpoint in their backyard.

Obama shouldn't be sending soldiers to fight in Syria; he should be sending them to help Chicago. He needs to send the National Guard to Chicago so they can arrest all the gang members, decreasing the amount of homicides. He shouldn't be launching air strikes on ISIS; he should be creating laws to banish guns. He shouldn't be increasing the number of soldiers heading overseas to war; he should be increasing the number of officers here, helping Chicago.

There is much that can be done to stop the violence in Chicago, but it cannot be accomplished while we are at war with Syria. If Obama is busy caring about the air strikes on Syria and plans to destroy ISIS, who will be busy caring about Chicago and destroying the gang organizations here? Yes, we have a police force here that is meant "To serve and protect us", but something just isn't working. We need to look at fixing our own cities before we head off to fix someone else's.

Obama VS ISIS

        Currently in the United States, there are many differing opinions on how we handle the terrorist group ISIS. ISIS is an extremist Muslim group that has killed American reporters, a British reporter, and many innocent civilian people. Last week, President Obama gave his presidential address concerning the group ISIS and how the United States will handle it. President Obama said that we will use drones and further air strikes against ISIS, and we will have our allies’ help as well. This address sparked multiple emotions with many different individuals.
        Some U.S. citizens were in support of bombing ISIS, while others were strongly against going into a situation that does not directly involve us. Because ISIS is defying the United Nation sanctions, I believe the United Nations, not just the United States, should decide how to combat ISIS. There is already hatred in the middle east towards the United States because we have gotten involved where we do not belong. Our involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq are two examples of this. In the past years a good amount of the Arab countries have made a substantial change to their governments from a dictatorship to a democracy. Countries such as Egypt went through these changes. They were not assisted by the American people. This shows they could do it without American assistance. Alternatively, we are constantly the country that is pushed to make decisions that others cannot. Something must be done to stop the unjust murder of innocent people, but the United States cannot do it alone.
         In his recent address, President Obama stated, “... this is not our fight alone. American power can make a decisive difference, but we cannot do for Iraqis what they must do for themselves, nor can we take the place of Arab partners in securing their region.” This further supports the need for the UN’s assistance in stopping ISIS. The United Nations needs to act now to determine a logical solution to this crisis. Right now, ISIS is getting support from other groups, and they are becoming stronger while the United Nations stands idly by. The UN needs to act sooner than later to prevent more brutal deaths. We, as a world, not just a single nation, need to stand together and unify to eradicate the appalling terrorist group ISIS. We must put aside petty disputes and differences and come together to form a worldwide ideal of anti-terrorism. Through the efforts of the United Nations, this can be accomplished.

The Presidential Address

In his nation-wide address last night President Obama outlined the course of action he will take against the terrorist group known as ISIS. I thought that the President's speech was overall a good one, he convinced me that increasing air strikes on ISIS is a good course of action. I also think he did a remarkably good job of appealing to a wide variety of viewers; for the patriots he emphasized how ISIS has beheaded American journalists and is planning to attack the U.S., but for the humanitarians he emphasized the terrible atrocities ISIS has committed, such as killing children and raping and murdering women. He also made sure to highlight that there will be no ground war, which I think is critical because it reassured the American population that this will not become another war like in Afghanistan and Iraq; there will only be about 400 additional troops sent over who will be acting in strictly an advisory role to the Iraqi military.

However, although I thought the President did a good job appealing to all audiences, I wish he had been a little more specific instead of oversimplifying his entire argument. However, I think this was necessary because the general American public has a very limited knowledge of the middle east so he had to talk about everything in broad terms instead of outlining his actual plan. It also sense for him to give a speech like this because his goal is not to educate the American public, he’s attempting to win support for increased military action against ISIS, which he accomplished by appealing to people’s humanitarianism and patriotism. Overall, I thought his speech was very well crafted and effective, and he convinced me that increasing air strikes against ISIS is the right course of action.

Presidential address to teens

Last night, the presidential address started off with President Obama walking to his podium with American written everywhere, the flag to his right, his pin, and the seal on his podium. Obama started his address by discussing gruesome things happening in Syria and Iraq due to the terrorist group, ISIS. Obama talks about his plan to keep Americans safe while trying to destroy the terrorist group.

Later on, talking to my friends I realized not many people know about what is happening in the Middle Easr. Without having this assignment most teenagers probably would not know that Obama was speaking on this problem. Personally, I had no clue that this terrorist group had gotten so out of hand. The problem is not only in Iraq but also in America. Why is it that so many teenager do not know about these world problems. I think we need to focus more on the problem that teenagersare so caught up in their phones and celebrity gossip that they don't pay attention to the news. Obama's main audience is older people, but in two years the junior class can vote. Teenagers should try to put down their phones some times and learn more about the world outside and the problems we see facing.

Too many Americans forget that Islam =/= terrorist.

On Wednesday night, President Obama gave an address to the American people about the looming threat of the terrorist group ISIS. He touched on many relevant and interesting points, but one that stuck out to me was the way he emphasized that ISIS is not representative of Islam as a whole, and that it would be a mistake to regard them as such.

This is a reminder that, unfortunately, I think many American citizens would do well to heed. There is a disturbing tendency among some Americans to sweep all of Islam under the umbrella of terrorism (which pairs easily with the manic, chip-on-the-shoulder, gun-toting "'Murican" nationalism prevalent in some parts of the country), creating a sickening blend of pride and prejudice.

I would draw attention to this (satirical, thank goodness) blog post on the subject. The post speaks with the voice of an American who obviously has fallen under the delusion that Islam/all of Islamic culture and customs are automatically synonymous with terrorism. It includes a series of screenshots from a Facebook page which posted an image of a Muslim woman wearing an American flag as a hijab (the traditional head covering worn by Muslim girls and women). Under the photo, many people posted highly bigoted, profane and even violent comments about the photograph, calling the woman "disrespectful" and "a witch", and threatening bodily harm and even murder. The commenters bellow that the use of the American flag in this way is unthinkable, sacrilegious, immoral, obscene.

It has to be said, how many times have you seen a model in a skimpy American flag bikini? How many artsy photos of naked girls wrapped in the flag circulate on Instagram and Tumblr? It is a central tenet of our country to never let the flag touch the ground; however, I would draw attention to this. Where are the outraged comments on this picture about the misuse of and disrespect to the symbol of our nation?

The answer is, nowhere.

President Obama's speech only touched on this subject. It is highly likely that the people who really need to hear his warning not to generalize Muslims are not the people who would support or listen to Obama anyway. But as was mentioned in our class discussion on Thursday, much of the reason for the arguments the Commander in Chief made in his address was to sway the fencers in his favor. So his words about how ISIS does not represent all Islamic people by a long shot? Likely concocted to send a ripple of nods and murmurs of agreement through the people already on his side.

In short, the President's remarks about keeping ISIS separate from ordinary Muslims in the minds of Americans is a step in the right direction - a tentative, halting step, in the first mile of a marathon.