Annotation with additional source

Boortz, Neal. Somebody's Gotta Say It. New York City: Harper, 2007. Print.

The modern day War on Drugs proves to use methods that are more expensive that other options and create more of a burden for taxpayers. The current method used known as domestic law enforcment, which simply refers to the laws and law enforcement. Rather than treating drugs as a criminal offense, the government could instead offer treatment. When considering the efficiency of the two options one must remember that, "To reduce drug usage by 1 percent through treatment programs would cost about 34 million, while doing the same through our current domestic enforcement method costs about 238 million" (Boortz 204). By changing the method by which the government deals with drugs, the same overall goal could be accomplished for a fraction of the price.

Annotation Post

A political cartoon is a visual argument that relates to the broad topic of politics. According to Anthony Blair, “arguments have the primary purpose to influence people to change their beliefs, other attitudes, or conduct” (Blair 47). In political cartoons an argument of a political nature is made, and in most cases seeks to change the way in which one will vote. Using visual images to present an argument proves to be an effective way to present an argument due to the speed at which one absorbs visual information as opposed to verbal. For example, “Television shows today show about one to four dozen moving visual images in a 30 second spot, and we have no trouble processing the information. I it would be impossible to express 30 different propositions verbally in that amount of time” (Blair 51). Political cartoons prove to serve as an effective vehicle for arguments to be presented.

Argument against Convention

Although mainstream society may readily accept the idea that religion adds value to society, in reality is does more harm than good by causing a suppression of new ideas, as well as, producing violence that would otherwise not occur.

• The crusades and their connection to the dark ages
• religion's denial of scientific discovery and theories
• wars resulting from religious ideals
• religious extremism
• discriminatory ideals and values
  

Annotation Paragraphs

There are numerous right wing extremist groups that presently exist in modern America, and the Ku Klux Clan is one of them. The KKK was founded by six college students, who were also former Confederate officers, in Tennessee in 1966 (Anti-Defamation League). When the group realized the fear that their antics evoked in people, they used this to their advantage by recruiting new members. When the KKK grew large enough in numbers an organizational structure was formed. According to the article found on the Anti-Defamation League’s website, there was a supreme leader known as the Grand Wizard who served over the entire Klan, which was divided into “a number of realms, dominions, provinces and dens, which were in turn led by Grand Dragons, Titans, Giants and Cyclopes (Anti-Defamation League). Although the organization allowed the group to prosper in its infancy, the internal conflicts eventually impeded the organizations growth.

Annotations Paragraphs

America’s current War on Drugs is a danger to the integrity of the American Constitution itself. The Bill of Rights, which is contained in the Constitution, guarantees American citizens with certain inalienable rights. In efforts to eradicate drugs in American society, the government has infringed upon numerous rights ensured by the Constitution. Among these rights include search and seizure, as well as, a reasonable expectation to privacy. As Supreme Court justice Thurgood Marshall reminds us, “there is no drug exception to the Constitution” (qtd. in Wisotsky). It is important to consider the overall consequences of this alleged, War on Drugs, whether they are intended or not. The aforementioned points can be best put into words by the chief justice of the Florida Supreme Court who stated, “If the zeal to eliminate drugs leads this state and nation to forsake its ancient heritage of constitutional liberty, then we will have suffered a far greater injury than drugs ever inflict upon us. Drugs injure some of us. The loss of liberty injures us all”( qtd.inWisotsky).

The Prison Industrial Complex has proven to be a center of controversy in the United States. Prisons prove to be valuable to the growth of any city’s economy due to the private businesses that profit from the construction and maintenance of these facilities. When the interest of private businesses and the economy begin to have influence over the criminal justice system, is when the Prison Industrial Complex sets in. “A hotel has a strong economic incentive to book every available room and encourage every guest to stay as long as possible. A private prison has exactly the same incentive” (Schlosser 4). When you consider the aforementioned quote, it is not hard to see why legislation such as mandatory minimums had increased in past years. In his farewell address former president Dwight D. Eisenhower issued a warning to the American public stating, “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex” (qtd. in Schlosser 1) The Prison Industrial Complex is the modern day version of the Military Industrial Complex and in much the same way, should be guarded against.

Works Cited

Works Cited

Blair, Anthony. "The Rhetoric of Visual Arguments." Defining Visual Rhetoric. Ed. Charles A Hill. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Elrbaum Associates Inc, 2004. N. pag. Print.

Gray, Mike. Drug Crazy: How we got into this Mess & How we can get Out. New York City: Random House, 1998. Print.

"Ku Klux Klan History." Extremism in America. Anti-Defemation League, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2009..

Schlosser, Eric. "The Prison Industrial Complex." The Atlantic Dec. 1998: n. pag. Web. 22 Nov. 2009. .

Wisotsky, Steven. “A Society of Suspects: The War on Drugs and Civil Liberties.” Individual Liberties, Free Markets, and Peace CATO Institute. Oct 2 1992. Web. 12 Nov 2009.

Revised Text Wrestling Assignment & Response

“Our Cell Phones, Ourselves” Summary
In, “Our Cell Phones, Ourselves,” author Christine Rosen uses examples to get across her main point which centers on the issues of privacy and courtesy. The article discusses the development of cellular phones through recent history, and how they are most often used. Rosen delves into why most people feel the need to owned and operate a cellular phone. Issues of rudeness and detachment are touched upon throughout the article and it is summed up with a discussion of the effects of cellular phones on society as a whole.
The appearance of the first cellular phone was introduced to the world by the Motorola Company in 1983; it was known as the DynaTAC. The technology of cell phones continued to grow, and in the years following the permeation of cellular phone ownership spread through American Society. According to the article, which sites its information to Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, “There were approximately 340,000 wireless subscribers in the United States in 1985; by 1995, that number had increased to more than 33 million, and by 2003, more than 158 million people in the country had gone wireless.”
People become so dependant on cellular phone ownership and usage due to convenience and safety. Parents feel a need to provide their children with cell phones in an effort to keep track of them and in turn, keep them safe. In the workplace it can increase productivity by allowing employees to check in from the field, as opposed to being forced to find a land line. Not all uses of cell phones are as constructive.
As with all forms of technology, there are unintentional negative consequences. One example of a negative consequence is what Rosen calls, “adulterous behavior.” Before the invention of cellular phones, married couples would generally be able to monitor the calls that their significant other was making or receiving. Cellular phones, especially prepaid cellular phones, provide an untrustworthy spouse with a secret form of communication. While this may be no excuse or even a cause for “adulterous behavior,” it certainly has an effect on its practice.
Another negative consequence of cellular phones is, “withdrawal from public space.” The concept of public space focuses on the public areas one perceives to be a shared area. When one carries on a conversation in a public area, on a cellular phone, they are actually intruding on the public space that is meant to be shared with others. The use of cellular phones in public also signals a sense of social withdrawal. According to the article with information cited to sociological studies, “It (the use of cellular phones) is the intentional removal of oneself from the social situation in public space.”
Rosen sums the article up by discussing the major problem of cellular phone use. The major problem, according to the article, is the “deinstitutionalization of personal bonds.” The more one uses their cell phone in public, the less available they are to communicate with the public. Personal relationships are increasing, but contact with the general public is decreasing.
The article described this lack of contact as an “erosion of the face-to-face community. This problem leads to distrust and anxieties that are at a level of paranoia.
Rosen’s article, “Our Cell Phones, Ourselves,” discusses few positives of cell phone use and ownership, while focusing mainly on the proliferation of cellular phones in society and the negative consequences on the individual and society as a whole.
The subject matter of Rosen’s article proves to be eye opening when viewing the behavior in society. It seems no matter where one may be, there is someone using a cell phone. Whether it is in a workplace, a school, public transportation, or even a church, it seems no place is left sacred. The generation that has grown up with cell phones has become progressively withdrawn from society, and seems to respond to every awkward or uncomfortable situation by using a cell phone to avoid it. While providing a sense of ease to life’s everyday tasks, people are missing out on face to face contact and the chance to meet new people. However convenient cell phones may be, one must stop to consider if the trade off is truly worth it. I, for one, am skeptical.

Sources for Annotation Project

(Prison Industrial Complex)
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/199812/prisons

(Ku Klux Klan)
http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/kkk/history.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_America&xpicked=4&item=kkk

(War on Drugs)
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-180.html

(Visual Rhetoric in Political cartoons)

Article Summary (Rough Draft)

“Our Cell Phones, Ourselves” Summary

The article entitled, “Our Cell Phones, Ourselves,” was written by Christine Rosen, and addresses numerous issues related to cell phone use. The article begins by discussing the development of cellular phones through recent history, and how they are most often used. Next, Rosen delves into the issue of why most people feel the need to owned and operate a cellular phone. Issues of rudeness and detachment are touched upon throughout the article and it is summed up with a discussion of the effects of cellular phones on society as a whole.
The appearance of the first cellular phone was introduced to the world by the Motorola Company in 1983; it was known as the DynaTAC and was used for business purposes. Soon after the invention of DynaTAC, in 1987, the Nokia Company followed suit, and launched its own cellular phone that made the technology slightly more available. In the years following the permeation of cellular phone ownership multiplied exponentially in American Society. According to the article, which sites its information to Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, “There were approximately 340,000 wireless subscribers in the United States in 1985; by 1995, that number had increased to more than 33 million, and by 2003, more than 158 million people in the country had gone wireless.”
There are numerous reasons mentioned as to why people become so dependant on cellular phones, but two are given most often. The two significant reasons for cellular phone ownership and usage are convenience and safety. When a college student participated in a classroom experiment in which she had to give up her cellular phone for 48 hours, her feelings about it were summed up in the following quote.
“I felt like I was going to get raped if I didn’t have my cell phone in my hand. I carry it in case I need to call someone for help.” This quote was significant in the article because it helps to paint a picture of how dependant on cellular phones people may become. Parents also feel a need to provide their children with cell phones in an effort to keep track of them and in turn, keep them safe. In some cases, the cellular phones are considered to be necessary for survival.
The other significant reason for having cellular phone is convenience. The ability to pick up a phone and make a call can serve several purposes. In the workplace it can increase productivity by allowing employees to check in from the field, as opposed to being forced to find a land line. One realistic example this article illustrates is a woman at a grocery store who has forgotten her list. Rather than returning home to retrieve the list or wandering haphazardly through the store, she can simply take out her cellular phone and call her husband that may then read the list to her. While the aforementioned situations prove to be positive effects of cellular phone use, not all are as constructive.
As with all forms of technology, there are people who use it for negative purposes. One example of a negative is referred to by Rosen as, “adulterous behavior.” Before the invention of cellular phones, married couples would generally be able to monitor the calls that their significant other was making or receiving. Cellular phones, especially prepaid cellular phones, provide an untrustworthy spouse with a secret form of communication. While this may no be an excuse or even a cause for “adulterous behavior” it certainly has an effect on the practice of it.
Another negative effect of cellular phones expressed in the article is that which is referred to as “withdrawal from public space.” The concept of public space focuses on the public areas one perceives to be a shared area. When one carries on a conversation in a public area, on a cellular phone, they are actually intruding on the public space that is meant to be shared with others. The use of cellular phones in public also signals a sense of social withdrawal. According to the article with information cited to sociological studies, “It (the use of cellular phones) is the intentional removal of oneself from the social situation in public space.” This removal may seem insignificant, but when viewed from a broader construct it can prove to be quite damaging.
Rosen sums the article up by discussing the major problem of cellular phone use. The major problem, according to the article, is the “deinstitutionalization of personal bonds.” While the use of a cellular phone may allow for more contact with loved ones which in turn can build a bond of trust, it decreases the amount of contact one may have with the general public and strangers. The article described this lack of contact as an “erosion of the face-to-face community. This problem leads to distrust and anxieties that are at a level of paranoia.
The article “Our Cell Phones, Ourselves” proves to be an eye opening realization of what cellular phones are doing to society as a whole. The proliferation of cellular phones in society is growing at a progressively high rate, and the negative effects of this are becoming increasingly apparent. Rosen points of the benefits of cellular phone use, but focuses mainly on the metamorphosis of society as a result.