rebuttal against Bianca's blog post

        Bianca's post suggests that teens above 16 should be able to vote. She says that teens know enough to make their own vote and that there are no such thing as wrong votes. In this quote, she demonstrates why teens know more than other people:

For example, with the parcel tax, teenagers who attend school and feel the effects of it not passing know full well what will happen. To some people, it would be just mean more taxes, but teenagers know that it is more than that.

I can surely say that not everyone who attends this school knows what is happening. This can be a combination of students not caring and others who just don't know what a parcel tax is. Not all adults are stupid. People such as the principal and teachers understand what the tax is going to mean too. Other people who don't attend this school probably don't know about it because they've never heard of it before.
        There is a such thing as a wrong vote. You can rate a president using their popularity and what they've done for the country economically, diplomatically, etc. If an individual voted for the candidate who was very unpopular and put the country into recession as well as plunge the country into wars then that person would've made a wrong vote. Let's use Bush as an example. His popularity is lets say not so good as seen in this CBS article. What has he done for our country? He made the American dollar weaker and did a bunch of other bad stuff that I will not go into detail with.
        I agree with her when she says that parents, teachers, etc. will have much influence on teens. Yes, they are entitled to their opinions and they make the final decision, but influence is still influence. It will always have weight on someone's decision and sometimes that weight may be heavy enough to make the decision for them. For example, there are teens that smoke. They could have been influenced by friends saying how cool it is to smoke or they could have watched the commercials and thought it would be a good idea to smoke. I would not count out influence as an important factor in voting.

Writing prompt from wednesday about Celie

        Celie's letters to God show that she believes and trusts God. In other words, she is religious. This is supported in this quote:

But I say I'll take care of you. With God help.(Walker, pg.3).

Celie looks to God for support even though there is not sufficient evidence that he even exists. She trusts God enough to ask him to help her sister. If that isn't religious, then I don't know what is. Her visits to the church probably influenced this trait.
        Asking God for help is a desperate move. She knows that she can only do so much to protect her sister and children. Her desperate pleas show she is willing to get whatever help she can find. Alice Walker writes,

Sometime he still be looking at Nettie, but I always git in his light.(Walker, pg.5).

The man in the story has a thing for Nettie, Celie's sister. Celie is determined to distract her and instead put attention on herself. In the second half of the quote, it means Celie is always getting in the man's sight whenever he is looking at Nettie.
         Celie takes on the mother role in this book. She is forced to take this role because her mother is sick and has to go see a doctor. Alice Walker writes,

By time I git back from the well, the water be warm. By time I git the tray ready the food be cold. By time I git all the children ready for school it be dinner time.(Walker, pg.2).

After he mother dies, the role is magnified. She has to take care of all the children alone. This includes protecting Nettie from that man. Her role later transforms to servant when she is sold to another master. However, she still worries about Nettie.
        Celie is mentally tough. Even though she was raped, she still goes on with her life. It doesn't seem like she has any mental issues because she never mentions it to her diary. Celie marries another man and leaves her original master. Later in the book, she makes new friends whose names I will not give away.

should teens be allowed to vote? opening statement

        Our constitution offers basic human rights to all citizens of this country, but teens are not allowed to vote. Should they be allowed to vote? Poll results like this one seem to show that people favor allowing teens to vote. I for one would like the current age limit for voting to remain the same. Teens have much more to learn and politics would overwhelm them. Teens should not be allowed to vote.
        Teens do not know everything about politics. High schools do not require students to study civics and political issues. These classes are offered when students get to college. By that time, those people would have turned eighteen and then they would be allowed to vote. Even then, young adults still don't understand everything about politics as this article states:

In recent elections, the turnout among 18- to 24-year-olds has been dismally low.

If young adults aren't educated in politics, what makes anyone think that teens would fare better than them? Keep in mind that these voters are either in college or working so they would have received more education than teens.
        In addition, teens have no time to worry about politics. They have high school to deal with and that should be a teen's top priority. With high school comes homework, finals, college applications,etc. All of this requires a lot of attention. Some teens even have to do community service or work part time jobs. They don't have time to read political magazines or watch political news on TV. I doubt if any teen is even slightly interested in them.
        If teens were brought into voting polls, candidates would try to exploit their lack of understanding and win them over. They would trick them with strategies like using political slang or by lying. Parents may also have an influence on their children. They might think that a candidate is good just because they trust their parents and their choices. Then, there are those teens that want to be funny and not take voting seriously. Those people might just pick the person based on their looks, name,etc. Let adults decide who the leader of our country should be. They ought to know better than us.

Advancing technology

        Technology is always advancing as long as there is civilization. This is still true today as internet and computers become more advanced along with phones. Tony's article shows the positive and negative sides of technology:

Internet is growing rapidly. The variety of speeds and the amount of things you can do with the internet are endless. More and more daily tasks are now easier because of wireless technologies. You can start your car from hundreds of miles away, surf the internet without any cords, but is all of this actually safe.

Tony then goes on to list smart technology such as the iphone and TVs that can access the internet. He explains briefly how people can hack iphones and download a bunch of apps and how they can also aid in grand theft auto.
        All of this is definitely true as I've seen on TV that a GPS system can help robbers get into homes by opening gates. It's also true how people can hack iphones and use it. The same can be said for computers as new malware is constantly created to destroy computers. So I would say that not all technology is safe. Just make sure not everything in your life is controlled by technology.
        Technology alone is not evil. It's just how people use it makes it evil. The same can be said for nuclear fission. It can be used to create nuclear energy or it can be used to make a bomb. All this knowledge of technology is harmful if it falls into the wrong hands. We can blame the internet for this problem. As the internet expands and it becomes available to more people, more information is spread out. People become smarter and these people include evildoers too. The reason we still use the internet is because the pros outweigh the cons. The internet helps with communication and research as well as serve as entertainment.
        Going back to the main question which asks if the technology is safe, I would say not all of this is invulnerable. Don't rely on it too much. Other than that, technology can really make life easier.

who will win the super bowl

        The NFL playoffs had started a week ago and four teams have been eliminated. This weekend another four teams will head home. Lets start with the Falcons and the Packers. I'm starting it off interesting by picking the packers to upset the falcons. Both of the falcon's losses have come against playoff teams. I believe Matthews and Woodson would pressure Matt Ryan a great deal. The other game in the NFC pits the seahawks against the bears. The big story is whether the seahawks can pull off another upset like last week. The seahawks made history by being the first team to make the playoffs with a losing record(7-9). Then, they made history again last week by being the first team with a losing record to win a playoff game. I don't think they're going to do it against this team. Sure the seahawks beat the bears early in the season, but the bears are now a different and better team.
        Now to the AFC. The steelers clash with the ravens in a divisional playoff game. Earlier in the season the steelers barely inched by the ravens, beating them by a field goal(3 points). The game will be close like that one. I expect the steelers to take this one. In the other game, the jets and patriots square off. Earlier in the season the patriots steamrolled over the jets 45-3. After finding out about that, I pick the patriots to easily win this game.
        Of all the playoff teams, I pick the packers and patriots to make it to the super bowl. Between these two teams, I'm going with the upset and picking the packers to be super bowl champions. I know it's a bold prediction and that the patriots are regarded as the hottest team in the league and the patriots beat the packers earlier in the season, but that was because their starting QB was out. Even with that setback, they still did nearly win losing by only four points. That game proved that the patriots's defense is not impenetrable as the backup QB picked them apart.

Does it matter where you go to college?

        I have read all seven articles about elite colleges vs less selective colleges and have found that David W. Breneman's "Graduate School Matters More" makes the most sense. He believes that students should not look solely at college rankings when picking a university. Here's one quote from his article:

While the various reports on “college quality” are worth reviewing, a successful college experience resides in the relationship between a given college and a particular college student.

What Breneman is trying to say is students should pick the college after taking into account the setting, finance and size of the university. Setting is quite important. Some people like to stay close to home so they can return home more often for visits and not get homesick. Others want to get as far away from their parents as possible for freedom.
        Finance must be considered no matter what unless the student has a scholarship. Rich people can go wherever they want, but the less fortunate may have their options limited. The size of the college isn't as important, but still worth thinking about. If the student was to go to an elite college, chances are the subject would blend and be lost into the crowd of thousands of peers. Going to a smaller school increases the chances of being able to stand out.
        In contrast, I chose Kevin Carey's "Skip the Admissions Game" as the least persuasive argument. The main point wasn't really clear. The beginning said that elite colleges are good choices and then the second half explains how some community colleges are as good as some elite colleges. Here's two quotes from his article:

...you should seriously consider going to an elite college or university.

It turns out that the best community colleges do a better job than the average elite research university at teaching freshman and sophomores.

In addition to this confusion, the writer supports his points with opinions and offers no statistics except for one website. I found no strong persuasive points and more opinions, but the really big mistake was not staying on topic. Two contradicting points does not make a good essay.