Child Sent to Principal for Writing Rush for President

Not so long ago, at an elementary school in the Jacksonville, Florida area, the administration made a survey wherein they asked the students whom they would have wanted to be elected for president: Obama, McCain, or other. One of the students replied "other" and specifically wrote down "Rush Baugh" (he meant Rush Limbaugh, obviously); consequently, he was sent to the principal and his mother was called in. The administration told her that it was inappropriate for her son to write that and that she "shouldn't be throwing [her] views on him."

HOW INAPPROPRIATE IS THIS? Seriously? First of all, why would you ask 10-year-olds whom they want for president? I mean, they're 10 YEARS OLD; what do they know about politics? And, some of the kids do choose Rush Limbaugh, how is that a problem? YOU'RE THE ONES WHO ASKED THEM! (Not you, I mean the school...) I bet that if the kid had written Keith Olbermann, the school wouldn't have cared.

Maybe I'm overreacting. But still, it annoys me to see people (especially youth) undergo discrimination for being Conservative. The public schools are responsible for much of this anti-Conservative bigotry. And I thought it was their job to remain unbiased, not brainwash kids to the left.

What do you think?

Is English More Important Than Math?

I saw on the graduation requirements for New Trier that is it necessary to take 4 years of English but only 3 years of mathematics. I thought that this was rather weird because I've always been told that math and English are the most important subjects that you can learn in school. But if this is truly the case, why isn't there a 4-year math requirement here?

English is extremely important, especially at the high school level. We learn how to compose analytical essays relating to the literature that we read. Learning how to read in between the lines (read on a deeper level) and write persuasive and cohesive papers is something that we will need to use for the rest of our lives. But whether you realize it or not, you will use the skills learned in math (I don't mean simple computation) in the real world as well. Math really teaches you how to think, how to solve real-world application problems, the step-by-step procedures of using logic, something that everyone needs. Memorizing really long formulas is not the point of math (unfortunately some people think it is); the point is to teach kids how to think logically.

Essentially, English teaches kids how to read, write, and argue. Math helps kids in solving real-world problems that require the use of logic. It seems like they are both equally important to me; therefore, there should be a 4-year math graduation requirement here at New Trier. But the thing about English is, even though many people speak it or are learning how to speak it, not everyone does. But math is a "universal" language - it doesn't take any certain language to understand the concepts of mathematics (so anyone can "speak math"!).

So what do you think? Is English more important than math? Should this graduation requirement be changed?

Stop Illegal Immigration

I think that it's seriously about time to stop illegal immigration. I haven't seen much of an attempt to do this because many people don't realize that it is nothing but a detriment to our nation's economy and safety. The one politician whom I trust that has the capability of fixing this problem is Mitt Romney. He has a wonderful plan basically saying that if you stop giving them food, money, and jobs, they'll leave! I mean, seriously, is it that hard to understand? One of the problems I had with the Bush Administration is that they did not do enough to attempt to stop illegal immigration.

Since 1996, our nation has had to pay approximately $400,000,000,000 for social services for illegals. We are obviously in a tremendous amount of debt right now, and the last thing we need is to be paying 400 billion dollars for people who shouldn't even be here! Also, they are responsible for taking over 11 million SKILLED jobs. Now, pardon me for believing that these jobs should be handed over to the many, many unemployed legals in America who are willing to work hard. I mean, after all, they are the ones who live here legally. Additionally, since 1996 we have had to pay about 15 billion dollars for their education (K-12), which is incredibly unfair. We could have used all of this money to better the educational programs on which some schools need improvement.

The crime rate and drug trafficking has severely increased due to illegal immigrants. There are around 730,000 illegal alien fugitives. Many of the members of some of our nation's most vicious gangs that traffic drugs are illegals. The cost of incarcerations of illegal immigrants since 2001 is approximately $1,500,000,000. Plus, I watch America's Most Wanted sometimes, and many of the criminals wanted are illegal aliens.

Please don't misinterpret my argument. I am not against immigration, just illegal immigration. I just want to show you how detrimental it really is. If you want to come to America, please join us. But do so legally, and learn English.

(Note: these statistics were taken from an illegal immigration hotwire, immigrationcounters.com)

Capital Punishment

Something tragic just happened in Florida. During a family celebration on Thanksgiving, a man shot his twin sisters, aunt, and 6-year-old cousin to death. This is obviously not the first time that something like this has happened, and it is not a pleasant thing to think about. But after I hear about these events occurring time and time again, I think about the appropriate consequences of these evil deeds. Should there be a death penalty?

Personally, I believe that there should be a death penalty. Well, it should only be used for very SERIOUS crimes–which would involve the death of at least 1 person–and there must be absolute 100% evidence that the criminal is guilty. This "absolute evidence" would entitle the use of DNA, fingerprinting, video cameras, witnesses, etc.

Let's look at Saddam Hussein. The man killed his entire soccer team for losing. He put his own people into plastic shredders. He ended up killing a grand total of approximately 200,000 of his own people. Now, this man is the definition of evil. As we probably all know, Saddam Hussein was sentenced to death by the Iraqi court. I personally think that the death penalty in this case is well deserved, but some people disagree with me. I mean, after Hussein committed all of those evil crimes, why should we have to pay for his cable TV in prison? Why should we have to pay for the many meals he will be eating in prison? It just doesn't make sense to me. For one, I think that if you are truly as evil as Hussein you don't deserve to live. And even if you were to live, you shouldn't be given such luxuries as cable television.

What do you think?

Thanksgiving

As we all know, Thanksgiving is coming up relatively soon. Many people prefer to spend Thanksgiving with their friends and loved ones and stuff their faces with delicious food. In the spirit of the holiday, I read a poem about Thanksgiving written by Joanna Fuchs:

Thanksgiving Feasting

When the Halloween pumpkins are gone,
And the leaves have all fallen to ground,
When the air has turned windy and cold,
Then Thanksgiving will soon be around.

Thoughts of loved ones all feasting together,
Pleasant pictures from past times appear
To dwell in each heart and each mind--
Then Thanksgiving is finally here!

The kitchen has scrumptious aromas,
The dining room looks oh, so fine,
Decorations with pilgrims and turkeys,
And now we are ready to dine!

First the napkins are placed on our laps;
Now the prayer for the meal to be blessed,
Then we stuff the good food in our tummies,
And we hope for it all to digest!
By Joanna Fuchs


This poem got me thinking: Why shouldn't every night be a "Thanksgiving"? I mean, we obviously don't have to eat turkey every night, but why is it just once a year that we really show gratitude for everything that we have? Especially around here, we are very lucky and have many privileges that others do not. Although I really enjoy the food eaten on Thanksgiving, I believe that being thankful should be emphasized more than just once a year. One might even argue that you should be thankful for being born because the chances of life are so small. Anyway, the poem also got me thinking that possibly nowadays Thanksgiving's whole meaning (getting people to be thankful) has disappeared and that people only like the holiday for the food. My personal opinion is that being thankful is more important than the food, but obviously not everyone agrees.

What do you think?

Friday the 13th

Many people think that Friday the 13th of any month is an unlucky day. If this is the case, then 2009 has really been an unlucky year; we have had 3 Friday the 13ths (one of which is today!), and this only happens every 11 years apparently. An article about this topic entitled "Friday the 13th: Your Luck Is About to Change" grabbed my attention.

America has a tremendous fear of the number 13. In fact, in many buildings, apartments, hospitals, etc., there is no floor 13! It simply goes from floor 12 to 14. How strange is that? I personally think that's an embarrassment; this superstition needs to stop! Many historical figures have also had an unusual fear of the number 13. FDR, for instance, never traveled on the 13th day of any month and never hosted a dinner party with 13 guests.

This belief (that numbers are connected to life and the physical world) is called numerology. It has had quite  a history, and now it is considered a para-science, just like astrology (don't even get me started on how much I hate astrology!). According to professional numerologist Sonia Ducie, "Numerology can 'make sense' of an individual's life...by recognizing which number cycle they are in, and by giving them clarity."

There's one little tiny issue here (which is why mathematicians dismiss numerology): THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF OR SCIENTIFIC MERIT!!!!!!!!!!!! According to astrophysicist Mario Lirio, "Seemingly coincidental connections between numbers will always appear if you look hard enough." This is why I am so annoyed by things like numerology and astrology; they aren't real! I wouldn't mind if this stuff were made illegal, personally, because I really think that people need to accept the fact that this stuff is a load of junk and should be spending their time worrying about reality.

What do you think?

Sarah Palin & The 2008 Election

Approximately a year ago from now, we found out that McCain/Palin lost the 2008 election. Did you listen to McCain's concession speech? Well, if you did, you'll notice that it was pretty clear that Sarah Palin was standing near John McCain on the stage, but she did not say one word. Instead, McCain recited the entire speech himself.

I watched a 2-minute clip relating to this subject, and I found out that Sarah Palin actually wanted to speak. According to this video (taken from ABC News), in Palin's concession speech she would "praise" John McCain as a hero and explain how she believes that our country will do just fine under Barack Obama's presidency.

You're probably wondering, "Why couldn't Palin deliver her speech if she wanted to?" And the answer that the video presents is: the McCain Administration didn't trust her. No specifics as to why or how they didn't trust her were mentioned; maybe they thought she would mess up, were angry at her, etc. If Palin had something nice to say, I don't understand why they wouldn't let her speak. I think that it is unfair that she didn't get her voice heard. Don't get me wrong - McCain should have definitely delivered his wonderful speech - but Palin should have been given the right to speak as well. After all, she would have been our nation's Vice President, a very important role in our nation. Plus, many Republicans support Palin and think that she has future potential in the Republican Party. And if you think about it, between McCain and Palin, Palin is the real Conservative - McCain is only a Moderate Republican.

What do you think? Why didn't the McCain Administration want Palin to speak? In your opinion, should she have been given the right to speak?

Should American History Be A Graduation Requirement?

So far at New Trier, I have taken World History, Modern World History, and I am currently taking American History obviously. I am really fortunate to have been able to learn about various different parts of the world and their historical significance. However, whenever I take a course (regardless of the subject material - could be math, science, social studies, etc.), I always ask myself the same question, "Should this be a requirement?" I even ask myself this question when I'm taking courses that are NOT graduation requirements. And this blog will discuss whether American History should be a graduation requirement.

From the start, I think it is extremely important to learn about the country in which you live. After all, that is essentially your country - it shapes your everyday life and is arguably part of who you are - making it important for you to learn about. Plus, many people believe that the country in which we live is the greatest on Earth, due to its many significant historical figures, pure freedom, and magnificent world-wide contributions. So, if you are one of many people who believe that America is the greatest country on Earth, you will probably find it necessary to learn about America's history.

However, some people do not find it enjoyable or necessary to learn about US history. Some believe that we should spend more time in school learning about other nations in South America, Europe, Africa, and Asia. Also, many people believe that people should be given the choice to take whatever history courses they desire; if one does not wish to enroll in a US history course, he or she should not have to. Additionally, some people think that America is not that great of a country, so they find no need to learn about its history.

Personally, I believe that American History should be a graduation requirement. I think that there are so many important aspects of America's history that should definitely be taught to students. For example, I find it important to learn about many great American historical figures - such as George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Benjamin Franklin, etc. - whose great minds and contributions have shaped America and other parts of the world. I also think it's essential to learn about America's major contribution in WWII, possibly one of the world's most significant occurrences. Basically, because America has a rich history and has strongly impacted other countries, it is important to learn about its history.

What do you think?

To how much privacy should we be entitled?

Today in American Studies, we had a discussion on privacy. Should privacy be a right? How much privacy should everyone be allowed to have? I was wondering about these questions, and even came up with my own: Should there be a school directory, or is that an invasion of privacy?

I believe that privacy should definitely be a right. However, there are appropriate times when you must "give up" your privacy. For example, if you're registering your kid at a certain school, you must give the school your name, phone number, home address, email address, etc. But you should only have to "give up" your privacy when necessary; it is NOT necessary to share any of your personal information with a telemarketer, on-line website, etc. (unless you want to...). And, of course, there are certain things that you should never have to tell anyone, like your social security number (unless you're applying for a job). Basically, I believe that each person should have the right to disclose however much about him/herself as he/she desires, but at the same time, there are certain times when one must disclose some of his/her personal information in order to accomplish something (like school registration).

I think that having a school directory IS an invasion of privacy. I believe that, if you want the school to put your address and phone number in a book that everyone will see, you should have the right to; but if you don't, then it shouldn't be a requirement. There will always be people who abuse directories and take other people's addresses and phone numbers and use them in the wrong way (like prank calling). And besides, there are some people who just don't feel comfortable knowing that 4000 other students can look up their address and phone number. I think that we should respect these people and, consequently, not list their address and phone number in the directory.

What do you think?

Obama Winning Nobel Peace Prize

Everyone knows that President Obama recently won the Nobel Peace Prize. He accepted it as a "call to action" to work with other nations in attempt to resolve current issues. I wanted to look into Obama's winning this prize, so I read an article about the subject entitled "Obama: Nobel Peace Prize 'a call to action.'" I tried to be open-minded, so I got this article from msnbc.

Personally, I never understood why Obama won this award. He hasn't done much for America, and a lot of what he has done has actually hurt our economy. And, importantly, Obama hasn't done anything for peace or humanity, the whole point of winning the award! According to the article, though, "Nobel officials said their stunning pick was meant to build momentum behind Obama's initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim world and stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism." Essentially, they gave him the award because they thought that it would help to resolve current issues.

So apparently, the Nobel officials did have a rationale for selecting him. But I still don't understand their logic. How can giving him the Nobel Peace Prize possibly ease tensions with the Muslim world? I just can't quite grasp the concept that giving someone an award will all of a sudden lead to world peace!

I think that there might be other motives behind the Nobel officials' giving Obama the award. This may have been a "stab" at former President George Bush. Maybe the Nobel officials are so happy that Bush is gone (because they think he was a horrible president) that they gave Obama this award to rub it in Bush's face.

What do you think?

What is race?

This week in American Studies, we have been discussing race. What is race? How would we define it? The documentary we watched added to this theme. Personally, this theme grabs my attention, and I have taken some time to think about it outside of school.

My definition of "race" is someone's ethnic background, relating to the countries from which his or her ancestors came. Race and religion are completely separate, and someone's race is not always related to his or her skin color. In my opinion, "white" and "black" are NOT races; they are simply skin colors. "British," "French," "Chinese," "African," etc. are races, as they are adjectives describing actual countries and continents.

Different races have different values and cultural aspects; no race is the exact same as another, although some may be similar. For example, the Asian culture strongly promotes education. Some races do not get along well with each other because they have different beliefs. For instance, the Israelis and Palestinians are in conflict because they disagree on who should be given Israel. In the United States, we have gotten to know many different races because so many people of different ethnic backgrounds have immigrated here.

I am interested in hearing your opinion...

2016 Summer Olympics

The host city of the Games will be announced today. Some people are very excited and, especially around here, want Chicago to be the host city. Personally, I have always enjoyed the Olympics and am hoping that Chicago will be the host city.

I read an article entitled "Ten Reasons Why Chicago Should Host the 2016 Olympic Games" (written by Sophia S. Mark). It was a pretty convincing article. Obviously, we don't have time to discuss all 10 reasons, so I'll talk about the ones that I find most important and interesting.

For one, Chicago has a lot of different ethnic neighborhoods, so it is a very welcoming city. Say that someone visiting from Greece becomes homesick. He/she can just go on over to Greektown. Say that someone visiting from China becomes homesick. He/she can just go on over to Chinatown. You get the idea...

Also, Chicago cabbies are extremely aggressive. Not only does the article say this, but I have also personally experienced aggressive cab drivers here. If someone is running late for an Olympic event, the cabbie will have no issue getting that person to the event as quickly as possible.

It is my personal belief that Chicago is the most beautiful and tourist-friendly city among the different candidates. Miggs Field, with its majestic view of Lake Michigan and downtown Chicago, is a wonderful place for the Olympics.

What are your beliefs about this topic?

Obama on Late Show with David Letterman

I was reading this article from the Los Angeles Times called "Obama gets personal on the 'Late Show with David Letterman.'" Obviously, Obama got quite personal in his interview with Mr. Letterman. He talked a bit about his daughters' lives inside and outside of school, a movie that he and his wife have recently seen, and some of his dates with his wife. In addition to talking about his personal life and his daughters, Obama brought up some controversial topics like race, healthcare, and the situation in Afghanistan.

After reading this article, I couldn't help but wonder if there is something a bit strange about this whole incident. Should the president of the United States be allowed to go on a comedy show? I mean, obviously he has the right to, but should it be encouraged?

Personally, I don't think that having the president on a comedy show (which would include Saturday Night Live as well) should be encouraged. In my opinion, the president has by far the hardest and most serious job in the nation -- in many senses, our safety and well-being lies in his hands. Therefore, I think that the president must make it clear to the people that he is a very serious person, as his job must be taken seriously. And comedy is the opposite of seriousness. So, by going on a comedy show, the president is not giving the right impression to the citizens of the United States.

I am interested in hearing your opinion...

The Impact of our Environment

Last week in American Studies, we discussed the thematic question "How does our environment impact the way we act?" when talking about certain characters in Reservation Blues. This question is extremely applicable, and everyone can relate to it.

It's not at all a bad thing to "change" your personality/appearance when you're around different people -- it can actually be pretty wise. For instance, if you are in a college interview, you probably don't want to act like you would around your friends. And you would probably talk to your school principal differently than you would to your parents. Essentially, you act differently around different people because some people are more formal than others and you don't feel as comfortable around certain people as you do, say, your best friend.

Some people, though, see this change in behavior as superficial and fake. Is it possible that they're right? Should we always act the same way and never "disguise" our true behavior? Let's say you have a job interview, and the interviewer doesn't appreciate your "casual" behavior. You don't act too smart; you just act like you normally do around your friends. However, had you changed your behavior and sucked up a little, the interviewer would have loved you and given you the job.

Now, this leads us to the important question: Is it morally right to alter the way you act around different people? Personally, I think it is. Not only will it help you (like in a job interview), but I also believe that it is a good human quality, and your instincts tell you to do so.

Voting

Voting is an American right, a right that many people consider us fortunate to have because many other countries are not democratic. However, I have been questioning the "wonderfulness" of voting and have found some flaws.

First of all, I don't know if 18-year-olds should have the right to vote. For one, they can't even drink. Personally, I think it's absolutely preposterous that someone can have a say in who becomes president of the United States but can't even have a glass of wine. Also, many of them are still in school. Most educated and well-informed voters have experience. And, honestly, how much worldly experience can an 18-year-old possibly have? Also, many political issues are extremely controversial and require a tremendous amount of understanding. Your brain doesn't fully develop until you're in your twenties, so in many cases, some of these political issues would be a bit too difficult for an 18-year-old to fully comprehend. I am 16 years old (which is pretty close to 18), and there are plenty of economic issues that I don't understand that well. Additionally, because of school, most 18-year-olds don't have full time jobs, and some of them don't even have any jobs. I think that voting is a responsibility (it takes a lot of work to become well-informed and truly comprehend controversial political topics). And how responsible can you be if you don't have a (full time) job? After all, jobs require a lot of responsible work.

Second of all, I'm not sure if everyone's vote should be counted equally. I think that people who serve their country (in this case, the United States) in the military should have the biggest say. I mean, they risk their lives in order to help defend their country. As they work really hard to serve their country and face plenty of life-threatening obstacles while doing so (and many, unfortunately, don't even make it home), I think that people in the military should be given an enormous voice voting-wise. It's sort of like a gift; they do something nice for America, and America gives them the biggest say in who becomes president. This is the only circumstance under which I would be okay with an 18-year-old voting, because there are  plenty of 18-year-olds in the military.

I'm interested in hearing what you think...

Americans & Science... A Good Match?

Nowadays, it seems like much less people have an interest in science. In fact, there are currently less science majors in universities than there have been in previous years. But one would think that, with all of the scientific advances in America, there would be more science majors nowadays than ever. Science is a wonderful and essential subject matter that shapes every single aspect of our universe. Without science, we would be nowhere.

I read an article called "Bringing science back into America's sphere" by Lori Kozlowski. In her article she states that half of American adults don't know that the Earth orbits the sun once a year. Clearly, much more people need to be educated scientifically. But, why aren't they? Is it because they think that learning science will challenge their religious views? Or is it because they were just never taught that much science in school? Well, according to journalist Chris Mooney, none of these is the case. He says, "Science has become much less cool." So, maybe this is the answer -- people have no interest in learning something "boring" and "uninteresting." Maybe the schools are the ones to blame here.

I am going to agree with Mooney. I think that, should the schools make scientific studies more interesting and applicable, more students will be interested. When I took biology, sure I learned the parts of the cell and memorized a million vocabulary terms relating to human anatomy and physiology (which was NOT fun), but I never really learned how applicable it is, which is something I would've liked to learn (If I'm studying something, I want to know how useful it is!). So maybe we should've spent less time memorizing all of those terms and more time learning how and why biology is "essential."

Once students become more interested in science, they will be willing to study it much more. And then, maybe a lot more discoveries can be made. But again, the key to making kids like science more is to improve the ways of teaching it in school.

First REAL Post

Why do so many people in the United States take a foreign language?

This is something I've never fully understood. I take a foreign language (Spanish) for pure enjoyment; I like  learning languages. However, it seems like everyone around the world knows English. In foreign nations, most people involved in the industries of business and tourism speak English. And why would an American visit a foreign country, besides for vacation or business purposes? Clearly, it is more important that people in other countries learn English than we learn other languages. Maybe so many people here take a foreign language in high school because they think it'll help them get into a good college. Or, maybe they just think it's important to know another language. But at the same time, if it's so important, then why isn't it a requirement to take a foreign language at New Trier?

First Post

This is my first post! Yeah!