This portfolio was put together to highlight several areas that I feel are very strong in my writing. Each piece shows a different aspect of writing style, and together they give a pretty good picture of my overall writing skills.
The collaborative project highlights my versatility as a writer. It begins with an essay written by me that serves as an argumentative piece setting up the argument for the whole project. In this piece I use research by Jonah Lehrer in the book “How we decide” to create an argument for religion being inseparable from our decisions, and by extension politics. I'm very proud of this piece- I think that the use of scientific research about how we actually make decisions lends a lot of strength to our overall argument. It makes the argument not about how people are biased, but about solid facts about how people's brains actually work, a much harder position to attack.
The second part of the collaborative project that I wrote is a satirical list of 10 more commandments, highlighting the areas where religion affects politics. I think that satire is probably my strongest genre- this piece goes a long way in making the audience really think about our argument. The last part that I did was a political cartoon; this again falls into the genre of satire, and again uses humor to pull the audience into our argument.
The next project in my portfolio is a rewrite of RP3. My original RP3 was not a very strong argument. It used some research to make the point that manned spaceflight is a goal that we need to pursue as a nation. The problem was, I focused on the broad issues, but not the issues that matter to most people, and as a result it wasn't very persuasive. In the rewrite, I brought themes from my RP4 to the piece, focusing on issues that have a more direct effect on the readers, such as budget and jobs provided. This resulted in the piece becoming much more effective for the intended audience.
I have not yet chosen the blog posts that I am going to use, but I plan on choosing those that highlight more of my strengths.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Reflective Essay
Throughout the semester, I have been working on the many different genres of this class. Some were genres that I was used to writing, like the persuasive paper. Others, like the Pecha Kucha, were very new to me. The fact that these had their different challenges made the class very enjoyable, and very interesting. I wanted my portfolio to really show how my personality came through in each of the different pieces, and I really feel like I was able to do that.
My first piece took a look at how our freedom of speech was being minimized by many different areas of our world. This piece showed a very personal side of me, and it really showed my views on the freedom of speech. This was probably more of the easier pieces to write because it required very little research and really allowed me to express my opinion. Though this was a shorter paper, it gave me a chance to do what I was really good at. This compared to something like the academic essay (RP3) was very easy.
RP2 was a fairly interesting paper to write. It was a mix of both research and argument, and though it took some time to research, it still allowed me to use my “campaign ad” style of writing. I have always been better at writing papers and stories that were very uplifting and when writing about government, patriotic. This stems from my experience working in the State Capital and on multiple campaigns. It is noticeable in my later pieces that I have a very commercial-like writing. Though this is great for writing a 30-second TV spot for a political candidate, it does not work to well in an academic essay.
When writing RP3, I had a little bit of trouble coming up with a good academic feeling to it. I have never had to write in that style. So, the approach I took was to look at it as an informative essay, and then allow the research to be the persuasive part. When looking back on this paper to re-write it, I realized that I had a very uplifting style. This is not what I was trying to do, but it just turned into that kind of paper. When I rewrote the paper, I made sure make it much more academic. I added a little more of the research to make my paper very academic, and I also took away of the patriotic tone.
The Pecha Kucha was probably the strangest assignment that I have ever done in college. Though it was very different than my other projects, it was pretty fun. I felt like I was able to allow myself to come through in the presentation. It was a mixture of both academia and that patriotic style that I enjoy. At first I felt like this project was going to be very difficult because it was so new to me, but upon creating the Pecha Kucha, I felt it was a good way to approach the RP3. Instead of the reader having to guess what I was meaning, they can hear and see what I was trying to say. Overall, this was the project that allowed me to express everything that I wanted to.
On a whole, my portfolio will really give an example of what I am as a person. There are both academic portions, and the reader can see who I am as a person. My hope is that everyone who looks at my project will be able to understand why free speech is so important to me, and also understand who I am as a person. I am very proud of the way my portfolio came together, and I hope my readers get as excited about free speech as I am!
My first piece took a look at how our freedom of speech was being minimized by many different areas of our world. This piece showed a very personal side of me, and it really showed my views on the freedom of speech. This was probably more of the easier pieces to write because it required very little research and really allowed me to express my opinion. Though this was a shorter paper, it gave me a chance to do what I was really good at. This compared to something like the academic essay (RP3) was very easy.
RP2 was a fairly interesting paper to write. It was a mix of both research and argument, and though it took some time to research, it still allowed me to use my “campaign ad” style of writing. I have always been better at writing papers and stories that were very uplifting and when writing about government, patriotic. This stems from my experience working in the State Capital and on multiple campaigns. It is noticeable in my later pieces that I have a very commercial-like writing. Though this is great for writing a 30-second TV spot for a political candidate, it does not work to well in an academic essay.
When writing RP3, I had a little bit of trouble coming up with a good academic feeling to it. I have never had to write in that style. So, the approach I took was to look at it as an informative essay, and then allow the research to be the persuasive part. When looking back on this paper to re-write it, I realized that I had a very uplifting style. This is not what I was trying to do, but it just turned into that kind of paper. When I rewrote the paper, I made sure make it much more academic. I added a little more of the research to make my paper very academic, and I also took away of the patriotic tone.
The Pecha Kucha was probably the strangest assignment that I have ever done in college. Though it was very different than my other projects, it was pretty fun. I felt like I was able to allow myself to come through in the presentation. It was a mixture of both academia and that patriotic style that I enjoy. At first I felt like this project was going to be very difficult because it was so new to me, but upon creating the Pecha Kucha, I felt it was a good way to approach the RP3. Instead of the reader having to guess what I was meaning, they can hear and see what I was trying to say. Overall, this was the project that allowed me to express everything that I wanted to.
On a whole, my portfolio will really give an example of what I am as a person. There are both academic portions, and the reader can see who I am as a person. My hope is that everyone who looks at my project will be able to understand why free speech is so important to me, and also understand who I am as a person. I am very proud of the way my portfolio came together, and I hope my readers get as excited about free speech as I am!
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Short, Reflective Essay
This portfolio reflects a range of rhetorical strategies, each specifically responding to a particular exigence and each tailored to the audience, expectations, and genre for that audience. Every rhetorical situation carries its own set of constraints; in this portfolio I have strategically paired different types of writing with different audiences. The subject of all these different approaches is predominantly free speech issues on liberal arts campuses—the blog posts are the only exception, but I have learned about the relationship between genre and audience though them. I have explored what genre is through blogs, tried out several different genres for different rhetorical situations through projects, and matched genres to specific audiences in my essays.
In my final project I experimented with different genres and defined what genre means when considering rhetorical strategies. Writing a multi-genre essay inherently means assembling different types of information together to create a cohesive whole that reaches a specific audience. I wrote my essay to be accessible, and true, examples of the ways activism on campus ironically produces widespread student apathy. An academic article, for example, adds reputable authority to my claim that student activism is ineffective and therefore unproductive at inspiring apathetic youth to take interest. Pictures of a protest, however, let the reader experience the noise and colors of free speech that UW students daily wade through. Though both genres are simple enough to be understood quickly, they approach the same audience with different motives: the article draws a logical connection between over stimulation and desensitization, whereas the pictures provide a frame for the reader to understand the emotional discrepancy between activist students and passive bystanders.
In my RP3 project, I wrote with a formal voice to a specific audience: readers of an academic journal. Everything changes from my lexicon, to statistics, to examples and anecdotes, and length because of the change in audience. Rather than writing to a general, averagely educated audience, I wrote to a highly educated audience in a scholarly environment. The constraints of this audience include assumptions that this audience will readily understand complex ideas, will not need to be told through stories or pictures, and will have a longer attention span. Though I used real examples again, they were employed to place the issue of collegiate free speech into historical context—rather than entertain the reader. I have tailored the academic essay to reach an academic audience who is interested in more complicated ideas and deciphering national trends.
Blog posts provide an unrestricted forum in which to experiment with genre and try to define what it is (or is not). For instance, in “Genre is the Mother of all Rhetoric,” I first try to understand how an exigence elicits a particular audience, which in turn elicits a particular set of restrains to effectively write within. Understanding how audience and setting changes style is crucial: a presidential speech is may not be effective as an advertisement, a student protest may not effective as a research article. Similarly, in “The Proposal” I lay out the constraints of writing to an academic audience and explore what kinds of writing would be appropriate and successful. Likewise, “Multiple Genres” and “Carbone and Sista Tongue” are examinations of what genre is, how it works, and how to pair a genre with an audience. I felt that Sista Tongue wrote to a more specific audience than “Carbone,” but I enjoyed the variety of genres “Carbone” presented. “Sista tongue” is more strictly informational, but “Carbone” is persuasive on a personal level because of its tragic narrative.
I have learned that, to be an effective writer or a persuasive voice, you must consider who will receive your message and write for that particular audience. This means balancing pathos, ethos, and logos in a way the audience can relate to, this means using images and language the audience can easily understand, and this means writing in a voice that your audience is interested in listening to. In this portfolio, I have attempted to manipulate my rhetorical style in multiple ways, to correspond to formal and informal audiences, and employed many different strategies to communicate a message.
In my final project I experimented with different genres and defined what genre means when considering rhetorical strategies. Writing a multi-genre essay inherently means assembling different types of information together to create a cohesive whole that reaches a specific audience. I wrote my essay to be accessible, and true, examples of the ways activism on campus ironically produces widespread student apathy. An academic article, for example, adds reputable authority to my claim that student activism is ineffective and therefore unproductive at inspiring apathetic youth to take interest. Pictures of a protest, however, let the reader experience the noise and colors of free speech that UW students daily wade through. Though both genres are simple enough to be understood quickly, they approach the same audience with different motives: the article draws a logical connection between over stimulation and desensitization, whereas the pictures provide a frame for the reader to understand the emotional discrepancy between activist students and passive bystanders.
In my RP3 project, I wrote with a formal voice to a specific audience: readers of an academic journal. Everything changes from my lexicon, to statistics, to examples and anecdotes, and length because of the change in audience. Rather than writing to a general, averagely educated audience, I wrote to a highly educated audience in a scholarly environment. The constraints of this audience include assumptions that this audience will readily understand complex ideas, will not need to be told through stories or pictures, and will have a longer attention span. Though I used real examples again, they were employed to place the issue of collegiate free speech into historical context—rather than entertain the reader. I have tailored the academic essay to reach an academic audience who is interested in more complicated ideas and deciphering national trends.
Blog posts provide an unrestricted forum in which to experiment with genre and try to define what it is (or is not). For instance, in “Genre is the Mother of all Rhetoric,” I first try to understand how an exigence elicits a particular audience, which in turn elicits a particular set of restrains to effectively write within. Understanding how audience and setting changes style is crucial: a presidential speech is may not be effective as an advertisement, a student protest may not effective as a research article. Similarly, in “The Proposal” I lay out the constraints of writing to an academic audience and explore what kinds of writing would be appropriate and successful. Likewise, “Multiple Genres” and “Carbone and Sista Tongue” are examinations of what genre is, how it works, and how to pair a genre with an audience. I felt that Sista Tongue wrote to a more specific audience than “Carbone,” but I enjoyed the variety of genres “Carbone” presented. “Sista tongue” is more strictly informational, but “Carbone” is persuasive on a personal level because of its tragic narrative.
I have learned that, to be an effective writer or a persuasive voice, you must consider who will receive your message and write for that particular audience. This means balancing pathos, ethos, and logos in a way the audience can relate to, this means using images and language the audience can easily understand, and this means writing in a voice that your audience is interested in listening to. In this portfolio, I have attempted to manipulate my rhetorical style in multiple ways, to correspond to formal and informal audiences, and employed many different strategies to communicate a message.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Artist Statement
This multigenre essay examines the relationship between student activism and student apathy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison through current campus events, personal and professional surveys of student activity, and examples of student life. It is an essay documentary exploring the approach of centralized student action groups, and their counterpart, widespread student apathy. This essay challenges the public awareness approach that cause-oriented organizations take, and it investigates the intentional blind eye that students turn toward social and political expressions.
UW-Madison students are daily bombarded by the messages of committees, organizations, and affiliations exercising their right to free speech, but at what point do these authentic causes lose urgency due to students’ growing apathy toward all of the noise of a liberal arts campus? The public hyperactivism creates some fervor, some followers, and some awareness, but there is another large group of students who become immune to the voices and apathetic toward the causes. This is problematic because the more we are inundated with urgent, dramatic problems, the more we become desensitized to legitimate issues in our country and cease to be a progressive community.
There is a plethora of evidence supporting the existence of activism on campus; there is a collaborative for almost any assembly, minority, or problem in America—and many supporting global issues. The problem is not in opportunity or accessibility of social or political need either: the fruitlessness of activists on campus derives from the multitude of messages, all presented in nearly the same fashion, that hit young adults like advertising campaigns. A few go out and buy into the product, and the rest remain skeptical and unaffected. When social problems are emphasized as products, with corporate backing and banners and finances, it is unsurprising that students tighten the purse strings and feel unsympathetic.
This essay is a response to the springtime explosion of booths, banners, demonstrations, and giveaways that pop up after winter has boxed many them from library mall. Fall and spring are the prime times to catch students and offer them free food, drinks, tote bags, stickers, and swag in return for a couple of bucks, a signature, or some ‘raised awareness.’ Students find themselves forced into this rhetorical situation daily, often feeling the pressure and guilt of organizations trying to enlighten them through their right to free speech.
I chose an assembly of protest photos and a personal narrative/handouts to elucidate the social dilemma that students are physically faced with day to day. True examples more succinctly communicate how ubiquitous these messages and .org groups are and put the reader in an empathetic frame of mind. They also explore both sides of the rhetoric war—those students fervently fighting for causes and those passively passing them up, either impervious to the various exigencies or annoyed by their persistent nature. These true, very recent examples show, rather than tell, how widespread and varying activism is. Simultaneously, they compare how similar each organization’s approach to communication and fundraising is. In fact, at first glance most seem almost identical except for the different colors of paper used to catch the eye.
The two news articles, one local and one national, are logical appeals to the ethics of activism, and each demonstrates the irony of campus activists. First, in the local article about the Holocaust controversy in The Badger Herald (“The University of Wisconsin’s Independent Student Newspaper Since 1969”), over a hundred students exercise their right of free speech—by publicly protesting—in order to limit the free speech of someone else—another group’s freedom of the press. It is ironic that one particular attitude is demonstrating to stop another attitude’s demonstrations. It is a case where free speech is exercised in order to stop free speech. The second article, which examines a U.C.L.A. study of student apathy in the United States, argues that students are no more apathetic today than in the Sixties. However, it ironically ends by conceding that student activism is spread thin, non-collaborative, and generally too small to make quantitatively significant changes. Though its purpose is to persuade readers that students do, actively want to make the world a better place, it concludes by recognizing that individual, issue-specific groups are achieving little real progress.
The tragic irony of activism is that, while it succeeds in making copies and putting up tables year after year, together all of these different movements contribute to general campus apathy toward social and political issues. Students walk past the conglomeration of signs and flyers without stopping to read even one. If they happen to catch a message on a sidewalk they do not pause to remember it or write it down. Maybe they will listen if they are given something free, and in return they give their attention and awareness, for free. But how effective is this exchange at solving problems, changing lives, or teaching students about problems in the world? I cannot help but suspect all this fundraising is spent to perpetuate fundraising. I cannot help but sympathize with students who feel that their dollar is just another tiny part of a budget devoted to poster printing and an exaggerated belief in the power of awareness. If we were aware, they suppose we would do something. But maybe we are aware, and just don’t care to contribute.
UW-Madison students are daily bombarded by the messages of committees, organizations, and affiliations exercising their right to free speech, but at what point do these authentic causes lose urgency due to students’ growing apathy toward all of the noise of a liberal arts campus? The public hyperactivism creates some fervor, some followers, and some awareness, but there is another large group of students who become immune to the voices and apathetic toward the causes. This is problematic because the more we are inundated with urgent, dramatic problems, the more we become desensitized to legitimate issues in our country and cease to be a progressive community.
There is a plethora of evidence supporting the existence of activism on campus; there is a collaborative for almost any assembly, minority, or problem in America—and many supporting global issues. The problem is not in opportunity or accessibility of social or political need either: the fruitlessness of activists on campus derives from the multitude of messages, all presented in nearly the same fashion, that hit young adults like advertising campaigns. A few go out and buy into the product, and the rest remain skeptical and unaffected. When social problems are emphasized as products, with corporate backing and banners and finances, it is unsurprising that students tighten the purse strings and feel unsympathetic.
This essay is a response to the springtime explosion of booths, banners, demonstrations, and giveaways that pop up after winter has boxed many them from library mall. Fall and spring are the prime times to catch students and offer them free food, drinks, tote bags, stickers, and swag in return for a couple of bucks, a signature, or some ‘raised awareness.’ Students find themselves forced into this rhetorical situation daily, often feeling the pressure and guilt of organizations trying to enlighten them through their right to free speech.
I chose an assembly of protest photos and a personal narrative/handouts to elucidate the social dilemma that students are physically faced with day to day. True examples more succinctly communicate how ubiquitous these messages and .org groups are and put the reader in an empathetic frame of mind. They also explore both sides of the rhetoric war—those students fervently fighting for causes and those passively passing them up, either impervious to the various exigencies or annoyed by their persistent nature. These true, very recent examples show, rather than tell, how widespread and varying activism is. Simultaneously, they compare how similar each organization’s approach to communication and fundraising is. In fact, at first glance most seem almost identical except for the different colors of paper used to catch the eye.
The two news articles, one local and one national, are logical appeals to the ethics of activism, and each demonstrates the irony of campus activists. First, in the local article about the Holocaust controversy in The Badger Herald (“The University of Wisconsin’s Independent Student Newspaper Since 1969”), over a hundred students exercise their right of free speech—by publicly protesting—in order to limit the free speech of someone else—another group’s freedom of the press. It is ironic that one particular attitude is demonstrating to stop another attitude’s demonstrations. It is a case where free speech is exercised in order to stop free speech. The second article, which examines a U.C.L.A. study of student apathy in the United States, argues that students are no more apathetic today than in the Sixties. However, it ironically ends by conceding that student activism is spread thin, non-collaborative, and generally too small to make quantitatively significant changes. Though its purpose is to persuade readers that students do, actively want to make the world a better place, it concludes by recognizing that individual, issue-specific groups are achieving little real progress.
The tragic irony of activism is that, while it succeeds in making copies and putting up tables year after year, together all of these different movements contribute to general campus apathy toward social and political issues. Students walk past the conglomeration of signs and flyers without stopping to read even one. If they happen to catch a message on a sidewalk they do not pause to remember it or write it down. Maybe they will listen if they are given something free, and in return they give their attention and awareness, for free. But how effective is this exchange at solving problems, changing lives, or teaching students about problems in the world? I cannot help but suspect all this fundraising is spent to perpetuate fundraising. I cannot help but sympathize with students who feel that their dollar is just another tiny part of a budget devoted to poster printing and an exaggerated belief in the power of awareness. If we were aware, they suppose we would do something. But maybe we are aware, and just don’t care to contribute.
Reflection on the Multi-Genre Project
This multi-genre presentation is an excellent study in how different genres can create different effects on the reader. Using multiples genres allows the creator to create multiple effects for the reader, enhancing the overall argument. This means that we could use emotional appeals, with genres like the news articles and political ad, alongside pieces like the initial essay, which are meant to inform the reader in a logical and straight forward manner.
Several of the genres in our project help to give the feeling of timeliness. The news articles and political ads all focus on the recent 2008 Presidential Campaign, highlighting the issues that our project addresses in light of these current events. This shows how the issues are relevant to readers today, not just as some vague abstract idea about politics. I think that this is an important point; it brings the argument home for the reader, and shows them how the argument is relevant to them personally.
The emotional appeal in our paper comes largely from the satire, political cartoon, and political ad. The satire uses humor to open the audience up to the ideas presented in the piece. Humor serves to cause the reader to let down their guard, and makes them more receptive to the new ideas. The political cartoon uses humor for a similar effect, in this case reinforcing the arguments that have already been given. It is also used to break up the more lengthy genres, and give the reader a reprieve from simply reading text. The political ad appeals to the readers emotions by showing the sort of subtle hints that are used in real political ads. It is meant to give an example of just how politicians use the religious tendencies within the voters to manipulate their opinions.
The more logical appeals are realized primarily in the main essay and the op-en piece. The main essay sets up the argument, giving scientific evidence and research supporting the fact that religion is integral to our decision making. This makes the reader think about the topic logically. The op-ed piece does a very similar thing with respect to the topic of political campaigns; it presents a more logical argument about the necessity of being Christian to being elected president. This works well in tandem with the political ad; the op-ed piece gets the reader thinking about it logically, and then the political ad gets their emotional side involved in the process. This duality is very effective in pulling in the reader and getting their whole thought process involved in the argument.
Several of the genres in our project help to give the feeling of timeliness. The news articles and political ads all focus on the recent 2008 Presidential Campaign, highlighting the issues that our project addresses in light of these current events. This shows how the issues are relevant to readers today, not just as some vague abstract idea about politics. I think that this is an important point; it brings the argument home for the reader, and shows them how the argument is relevant to them personally.
The emotional appeal in our paper comes largely from the satire, political cartoon, and political ad. The satire uses humor to open the audience up to the ideas presented in the piece. Humor serves to cause the reader to let down their guard, and makes them more receptive to the new ideas. The political cartoon uses humor for a similar effect, in this case reinforcing the arguments that have already been given. It is also used to break up the more lengthy genres, and give the reader a reprieve from simply reading text. The political ad appeals to the readers emotions by showing the sort of subtle hints that are used in real political ads. It is meant to give an example of just how politicians use the religious tendencies within the voters to manipulate their opinions.
The more logical appeals are realized primarily in the main essay and the op-en piece. The main essay sets up the argument, giving scientific evidence and research supporting the fact that religion is integral to our decision making. This makes the reader think about the topic logically. The op-ed piece does a very similar thing with respect to the topic of political campaigns; it presents a more logical argument about the necessity of being Christian to being elected president. This works well in tandem with the political ad; the op-ed piece gets the reader thinking about it logically, and then the political ad gets their emotional side involved in the process. This duality is very effective in pulling in the reader and getting their whole thought process involved in the argument.
Multi Genre Reflection
Our project really aims to allow people to think for themselves. We are approaching an argument that will be praised on some sides and attacked on the other, whereas, some people may just be indifferent. Our goal is to make sure that people are thinking, not just for themselves, but about themselves. We have found that religion is an overarching area that people use to make so many decisions in there life. This is a good thing, however we need to make sure that people are not just using religion to make those decisions. This should go for all experiences and beliefs in life as well. People should use their beliefs and experiences as a whole to make decisions. If religion is one of those things, it should be included, but it should not be the sole deciding factor.
It is my hope that our project will make people think about everything as a whole, as opposed to just using one aspect of their life. All of our different genres attempt to do this. We use emotional connections, satire, and basic news to help show voters how these ideals affect their lives. I think that this will allow for our readers to be involved in the project, but not get bored. All of the different genres bring new things to the table. Our main essay introduces the topic and the basic argument, while our op-ed piece gives a much more opinionated approach.
My favorite portion of the project is the use of satire. Our "Lost Commandments" and political cartoon show an extreme example of how people use religion in our country. Though I do believe that religion is very important and we need to keep from imposing our beliefs on those who do not want them. It is my hope that we can bring those who want to involve religion and don't want to involve religion together. After going through our project, I believe that our readers will understand the reasons on why we need to use all of our experiences to make decisions.
It is my hope that our project will make people think about everything as a whole, as opposed to just using one aspect of their life. All of our different genres attempt to do this. We use emotional connections, satire, and basic news to help show voters how these ideals affect their lives. I think that this will allow for our readers to be involved in the project, but not get bored. All of the different genres bring new things to the table. Our main essay introduces the topic and the basic argument, while our op-ed piece gives a much more opinionated approach.
My favorite portion of the project is the use of satire. Our "Lost Commandments" and political cartoon show an extreme example of how people use religion in our country. Though I do believe that religion is very important and we need to keep from imposing our beliefs on those who do not want them. It is my hope that we can bring those who want to involve religion and don't want to involve religion together. After going through our project, I believe that our readers will understand the reasons on why we need to use all of our experiences to make decisions.
Blog Post 8 - Multi Genre Example
Sept. 23, 2008 - Chicago, IL – Almost one month after the Democratic National Convention, rumors have sprouted up, again, about the religion of the Democratic Presidential Nominee, Barack Obama. Since last January there have been reports that Obama is not a US citizen. Though no birth certificate has been provided, the campaign insists that Obama is a United States Citizen. This story has died off in late due to an uprising of reports that Obama is of Muslim heritage and descent. Obama’s father, a Kenyan citizen, gave his son the name Barack Hussein Obama, and this sparked the idea that Obama, in fact, is not Christian.
The Obama campaign was quick to set the record straight when asked at one of their campaign stops. Obama said, “I've been to the same church, the same Christian church, for almost 20 years.” When speaking to donors at the up scale downtown Chicago restaurant, Gibson’s, he made sure to put an emphasis on the word Christian. Not only has this story brought down Obama’s polling in many states, it has taken over the media. At every small town campaign stop, both the media outlets and voters are questioning Obama’s religion.
When speaking with voters, there is an overwhelming feeling that Obama has not been telling the whole truth about his religion. Martha Crosby, a 56 year old resident of Adams Mills, OH, explained how she was worried that if Obama was lying about his religion, she wanted to know, “What else is he hiding?” The other portion of Obama’s religion that is worrying voters, is the influence of Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Even though Obama is claiming to be Christian, voters are wondering if he is in line with the rest of America.
David Rockstead, a member of the St. Peter Lutheran Church in Fort Meyers Beach, FL, does not believe that Senator Obama has his best interests in mind. “Every time I hear Mr. Wright speak, it seems like he hates America. That is not someone I want to advise the President,” said David.
We went around to many different cities and asked everyday Americans what they thought of Obama’s religion. Some were supportive of Obama, and spoke to the fact that he was still Christian and that is what mattered. Whereas, many were upset that they could not be positive what religion Obama was, and that they told us that they needed a President who had the same moral and values as they did.
This will continue to play out between now and the election.
The Fox News team will continue to follow this important story as it develops and keep you updated on every breaking news story from the campaign.
The Obama campaign was quick to set the record straight when asked at one of their campaign stops. Obama said, “I've been to the same church, the same Christian church, for almost 20 years.” When speaking to donors at the up scale downtown Chicago restaurant, Gibson’s, he made sure to put an emphasis on the word Christian. Not only has this story brought down Obama’s polling in many states, it has taken over the media. At every small town campaign stop, both the media outlets and voters are questioning Obama’s religion.
When speaking with voters, there is an overwhelming feeling that Obama has not been telling the whole truth about his religion. Martha Crosby, a 56 year old resident of Adams Mills, OH, explained how she was worried that if Obama was lying about his religion, she wanted to know, “What else is he hiding?” The other portion of Obama’s religion that is worrying voters, is the influence of Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Even though Obama is claiming to be Christian, voters are wondering if he is in line with the rest of America.
David Rockstead, a member of the St. Peter Lutheran Church in Fort Meyers Beach, FL, does not believe that Senator Obama has his best interests in mind. “Every time I hear Mr. Wright speak, it seems like he hates America. That is not someone I want to advise the President,” said David.
We went around to many different cities and asked everyday Americans what they thought of Obama’s religion. Some were supportive of Obama, and spoke to the fact that he was still Christian and that is what mattered. Whereas, many were upset that they could not be positive what religion Obama was, and that they told us that they needed a President who had the same moral and values as they did.
This will continue to play out between now and the election.
The Fox News team will continue to follow this important story as it develops and keep you updated on every breaking news story from the campaign.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)