This article isn’t about our best government leader going’s on a randt so to say. Classic puns by me. This shows Rand Paul’s opposition to this constitutionally illiterate document. I really wouldn’t use any of the techniques shown. I would possibly use the same quote integrations. The bland nature is not what you want in a political article. Make it exciting. That’s what I’ll be attempting. This is another no argument.
This article is great. I love the format. Each paragraph or at least most started with a question in bold. This allowed you to know what was up. The author showed their feelings on the issue. They provided extra snippets of reading on the code and things it’s done. The inclusion of questions in the text was a part I really enjoyed. Also they had a part about my favorite person in politics Rand Paul.
Great article. It used questions to make you think. One of my favorite aspects was the charts with evidence showing how horrible the bill is. The strong stance taken gets me fired up and feeling the same way. I would say the font and line spacing was a bad choice. It made it hard to read which fought against everything else to disengage you. Overall the article was strong but my favorite remains the Forbes article because I want the same tone as the author.
The only thing from the article that I would use is the layout. I liked the use of shot paragraphs broken up. It made it very easy to read. My problem with the article is the fact that it didn’t take a stance. A report on a hot press issue like standing for the anthem needs a stance. My essay will be argumentative and this didn’t help me see I good way to do this.
An extraordinarily boring article. The author is doing there job as a straight forward report. This is an example of what not to do. I want to get the information across with some zest and passion. I think that’s the largest problem with the article it lacks passion from the author. The idea of war was skimmed over which is why I couldn’t get interested. She needed to start with an engaging hook that envies fear.
The thing about this article that I would like to try and incorporate into mine was the way she spoke. The author basically called a stranger an idiot for not checking her nutrition facts. That idea of attacking the issue on a small idea that no one pays attention too is very smart. There is little rebuttal anyone can make because no one knows about that piece of information. The one problem I had with this was the argument got old and I was disengaged because it was long. If more ideas were presented it would have been better, which is something I will now do in my paper.
This article was the opposite to the last one I read. It was incredible engaging. It even evoked anger from me some times. The inclusion of graphics made the article seem less like a have to and more like a want to read. I can use important stats from this article in my paper as well. Especially the one about how only one terrorist was convicted under the patriot act who would have been convicted anyway. The argument of founders intent was a great last straw to end on.
This article was incredibly boring and painful to read. The author solely talks about fact in a completely monotone voice. I understand it’s an informative article but the just lack of effort the author used in the article made it a pain to read. They did use good facts for background information, but I would have appreciated a possible stance on the issue.
This article while I disagree with the point of an increase in taxes is awesome. The author is incredible snarky and sarcastic almost to the point of being rude. This wouldn’t work for my article because I’m not speaking about how the president and Congress with few exceptions suck at economic policy. The author pretty much calls potus an idiot. On an economic level this is true. My opposition is the budget and taxes should be cut.
The subtle language she used would be useful in my paper. She talks about the struggle that I will have in my paper talking about Atticus being a good guy. In watchman he is portrayed as a racist. You could tell from her expressions that she and I shared the devistation of finding out the first Atticus. She described him as “a hero and decant man” which is what I’m trying to argue. She finishes driving home social justice and race relations which I’m trying to say he was a champion for.