Monthly Archives: October 2014

Responses to prompts on ‘They Say, I Say’ chapters 1 & 2

Chapter 1 prompts :




a. The experiments of a group of scientists suggest that there are dangerous levels of Chemical X in the Ohio groundwater.

b. One individual states their view in saying that this novel has certain flaws.

c. Football is said to be boring.

d. Some say male students often dominate class discussions.

e. The film may be viewed on problems of romantic relationships.

f. Writers are afraid that templates like the ones in this book will stifle their creativity.


If ever there was an idea custom-made for a Jay Leno monologue, this was it: professional sports. Isn’t that like ridiculous? Whatever happened to playing for fun? I happen to sympathize with professional sports, though, perhaps because it is hard to do what they do.


Chapter 2 prompts


1. topic – abortion

disagree: Abortion is commonly looked down upon by the general population and especially by those involved in religion. They say that abortion is equal to taking a life from this world. Those who reject abortion heavily reject those that are for it. Some also say that since one took the risk of having a child, it is their responsibility to pay for the consequences; hence against aborting the baby.

agree: Although abortion can look bad morally, those that are for it apparently are helping out the general population. Statistics state that the demand for resources increase because of rising population. Therefore, the idea of abortion are supported in many circumstances. Some do not deny aborting the baby because the individuals may not to ready to raise the baby and giving it a bad childhood/lifestyle.


summary of essay stating that there are alternatives to fast food(against Zinczenko’s claims):

Some say that there are no alternatives but for families on a really tight budget to live on fast food. They state that the only way to survive is to live on fast and cheap food. However, that is not the case as others state. Other claim that one can easily go down to the grocery market and buy some basic materials to compose a healthy and decent meal. The claim stated that the average family would save more money when buying the right groceries and the quantity compared to buying fast food every single day and night. Live healthy and live longer sounds like the way to go in the claims of those that are saying there are alternatives to fast food.

Is being overweight an actual medical problem? Or is it just a common stereotype held onto being an American?

The common argument is usually whether being overweight is an actual medical problem or it just being a cultural stereotype to Americans. Statistics do claim that the percentage of population having Type 2 Diabetes increased dramatically. Even the amount that is invested into the cure for Diabetes has increased from 2.6 billion, which was almost 60 years ago and 100 billion, which it is today. However comes to the other question whether it is just cultural stereotypes. Does the statistic above directly result from the consumption of fast food or could it be a different factor? Is it true that all Americans become obese because they eat fast food or can there be Americans that consume fast food and maintain their shape?

Revising Attitudes

Honestly, I did not like the idea of personally revising my own writing. This is because I literally see the mistakes that I made and I am correcting myself. I would say it makes me look a bit stupid. However, I’ve gone into the habit that it is better to better yourself and to see yourself as already perfect. Same thing with writing and the revision process. Dethier makes a great point in the article, the second point that is made in the “Resisting Revision” . Rather than seeking to make it better, we feel that it is already so good because we stayed up for so long lavishing it with our use of diction and rhetoric. However, the truth is that it needs to be revised in order for it to be truly a “success”, (mentioned in point #6). I’ve revised things that I have written in the past countless times. I’ve come to actually like it, because I can see how to make my work simply better. I guess revising, editing, and proofreading do have their differences. It can be seen as ‘layers’ of writing. I feel that revising is the main chunk of the “remodeling” process and editing and proofreading and more of ‘verification’ stages. I think Brock Dethier made some really valid points in his piece of “Revising Attitudes”. He really made his article relatable to the reader, especially those who do not value the idea of revision. All the resistances to revision are great but I specifically would like to relate to the second, fifth, and sixth. I know the feeling of finishing a paper at the morning of the deadline, as it states in the text. The feeling of not wanting to even touch or look at the paper any longer because of the work I had put into it that past night and morning. However, in any piece of work, not just writing, revision is necessary for key success. Which brings me to the next resistance to revision, that revision is a sign of failure. It is all about how the writer takes the criticism that is given by the editor. Sometimes, the harshness of the comments and even the color of the ink (mentioned in the text), can blind you from the positive side of the advice given. However, revision truly constructs a person and their work to the next level and ultimately the greatest. Lastly, I once felt that revision destructed my original piece of writing; because simply, it’s no longer original if it is revised. However, I had come to see that revision actually brings more to the originality of my work and leads me to improve my work in ways I could have never done alone.

Writer’s Notes: Rhetorical Analysis

Honestly, this writing assignment is very tough for me. I still have not fully gotten the full idea of the assignment and how to make the two pieces speak. After sharing some thoughts with some classmates in the library today, it gave me a much better idea of what to. I’ve spent some considerable amount of time with my sources and trying to get my thoughts down on the zero draft. I actually did make an outline and it sort of organizes my thoughts which is always a good idea. I’ve started to get an idea of the rhetoric that the writers try to impose and analyze their thoughts. For the assignment, I am learning more toward the idea that it is focused on how the writers display their thoughts through these articles. I just thought it would be really hard to write so much on it but I realized I could utilize the Aristotlean ideas of ethos,pathos, and logos. etc.

Annotated BIB 4 sources

Annotated Bibliography

Source 1: Dustin Hawkin. “10 Reasons Raising Minimum Wage Hurts the Economy”. About News. Web. 2 Oct. 2014. <>

Reflection/Questions: I really thought that Hawkins made great points. What particularly caught my eye were reasons #5,6,8,9,10. In a one point he made, in a nutshell, he talked about how raising the minimum wage would inevitably raise the price of the things that are being sold because it costs more to keep workers around. Logical points such as losing unskilled workers and hiring less skilled workers were made as well that made a great point.

Summary/Notes: The main point of the article was the main point of how raising the minimum wage hurts; whether it be the economy, people, etc. This main point was supported by 10 reasons. Because I cannot talk about all 10 reasons here, I will sum it up for those at overlap in reason. One point that was made in a couple of reasons included that raising the minimum wage would be a temporary fix and would deteriorate the economy in the long run. Other reasons that were made included how raising the minimum wage hurts those that are trying to be helped because jobs will be taken away to those that are less qualified, as aforementioned. Also, from an economic standpoint, Hawkins made a point that raising the minimum wage hurts those economies that have different standards of living in different states/cities. Lastly, the author emphasized this point most by giving it a preface, saying that minimum wage is not a job that is meant to support a family of five but to give an individual the taste of an entry level job and idealistically move up in the future.


Source 2: Frank Worley-Lopez. “How to Hurt the Poor: Raise the Minimum Wage”. The Canal. 11 Nov. 2013. Web. 2 Oct. 2014 <>

Reflection/Question: I felt that Worley-Lopez’s piece was not persuasive. Maybe it was because I had read a great piece prior to this one but this piece had so many holes and flaws, I felt. He brings up many statistics of how raising the wage would hurt the economy and by using the statistics and claims of others, I felt like I could not fully trust their math. Worley-Lopez also did a lot of math which sort of disinterested the reader and made his argument weaker in my eyes. I’m not saying I am against or for the idea of raising minimum wage but the argument in the text did not persuade me.

Summary/Notes: This argument was why minimum wage should not be raised. Worley-Lopez supported his argument by providing logical reasons as to what it does to the economy, local consumers, and even other workers themselves. He uses a lot of mathematical reasoning to persuade the reader of how bad it is to raise the minimum wage to 10$ that the White House is proposing. He seems to emphasize the point where a minimum wage job is not supposed to support an entire family but primarily for lower age groups, preferably under 25, and to just give them a taste of an entry level job.


Source 3: Doug Bandow. “Raising Minimum Wage Will Hurt More than Help”. Cato Institute. 9 Apr. 2013. Web. 27 Sep. 2014 <>

Reflections/Questions: I felt that this article made one great point in the article. That was toward the end of the article. Bandow quotes Democrat George Miller of the state of California, “it’s very unfair for people working for low wages who can’t support themselves.” However, Bandow came back with a very realistic point of saying how it’s fair for others to pay more of this minimum wage increase. Overall, I liked the argument Bandow was making and bringing up numbers from the Great Depression certainly helped.

Summary/Notes: Once again, Bandow writes about how raising the minimum wage will hurt more than help the economy. He supports this claim by supporting with various statistics particularly surrounding the idea that every time a new minimum wage is set (usually higher), it “prices people out of the market.” Also, Bandow brings up the many numbers from the late 20th century and even numbers from the Great Depression to support his purpose. Lastly, he makes a point saying that it would be only fair for the minimum wage to be set a standard, same thing with making everyone pay taxes, and same thing making the same people pay the same price for the same necessities.


Source 4: Andy Stern, Carl Camden. “Why we need to raise the minimum wage”. Los Angeles Times. 10 Mar. 2013. Web. 27. Sep. 2014. <>

Reflections/Questions: I like how Stern and Camden support the humanistic side of the argument. It seems that they base their argument off of the hard work that Americans put in and that in this economy, some families have to take minimum wage jobs in order to support their families. As a result I feel that they are trying to help those that need it. However, their constraint would be that maybe the people that need it most lose their job and the population that doesn’t need it gets to keep their jobs. (e.g. students, entry level workers, etc.)

Notes/Summary: Stern and Camden talk about why the U.S. needs to raise the minimum wage. They support their claim by saying that the hard work and long hours that Americans put in need to be recognized. They also add by saying that most families cannot support themselves through minimum wage jobs and that the wage needs to be increased.     They make a great point in saying that even after long hours after a hard day they come home knowing they cannot support their families without help from the government. In conclusion, they claim that workers do not value the work they put in because of what they get out of it.

Rhetorical Analysis Formal Proposal

I am analyzing the topic of minimum wage. I found a couple of articles that differ in opinion on thoughts of raising the minimum wage. The sources actually oppose each other in idea; one talking about how raising minimum wage hurts the economy and another saying that raising minimum wage helps the economy. I actually did not know what kind of articles to touch on for this assignment so therefore I went to the list of ideas you(Lisa) had posted in the document for the assignment. I saw the topic of minimum wage and immediately without looking further I started the research. Minimum wage is actually quite a very interesting and essential topic. The topic of minimum wage actually applies to a majority of the population. I’m not saying that everybody makes minimum wage but I feel everyone has some sort of thought or involvement in it. For me personally, I actually work and make minimum wage so I wanted to hear some opinions on raising the minimum wage. Another reason that led to me lean toward this topic is because so many great points and thoughts are shared in various articles or texts and it really makes me think; not just about what is in front, but all around.

Struggles/Questions: I don’t really know where to take the ‘first bite of the sandwich’ in analyzing the articles. From your explanations and elaborations about the assignment, I feel like I have this urge to make these two articles argue with each other in a way through this rhetorical analysis assignment. Please let me know if that idea is headed in the wrong direction. Hm, after also reading the project assignment document, I see that you want us to analyze every little detail of how the text is composed and why it is that way to make the claim for the writers stronger. But I don’t know how to analyze the two voices at the same time. Im so confused, please help Lisa!