I have conducted extensive research on dog breeding and the world of show dogs. After that research, I have decided that legislation should be enacted to govern dog breeding.
The most predominant issue is pet overpopulation. The AKC doesn't really recognize that it even exists. Conversely, PETA believes that virtually no one should breed, unless a specific license is obtained. Clearly, a middle ground should be reached.
Few laws currently exist surrounding breeding. Basically anyone can breed as dogs wherever and whenever they choose. This lack of governance has resulted in millions of dogs euthanized yearly in shelters. Also, puppy mills are rampant throughout the U.S. They provide almost all of the dogs that are sold in pet stores.
Honestly I think that people just don't do the adequate research prior to purchasing a dog. Every breed is different and not all of them will work for everyone. Ample research is required before buying a dog. Also, dogs should be purchased from reputable sources. Yes, the AKC has members that are often "good" breeders, but they are harder to find and often more expensive.
The only viable way to ensure the safety of animals is through legislation. Money should be put behind laws, then it should be used to govern them.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Viaduct Replacement
A replacement to the Alaskan Way Viaduct is inevitable, thus I would vote in favor of a tunnel. First and fore most, our state is in dire need of jobs and this project would provide tens of thousands of jobs throughout the next nine years.
Next, Seattle is well-known for traffic problems. Nothing will better relieve conjestion than additional roadways. Seattleites that currently use public transportation are unlikely to revert back to the roads just because a new tunnel is in existance. Yes, the tunnel could free up some traffic, but it is not likely to solve the problem all together.
Finally, the current viaduct is dangerous. Numerous experiements have proven that it is likely to collapse in an earthquake. A safe and effective alternative is necessary.
Next, Seattle is well-known for traffic problems. Nothing will better relieve conjestion than additional roadways. Seattleites that currently use public transportation are unlikely to revert back to the roads just because a new tunnel is in existance. Yes, the tunnel could free up some traffic, but it is not likely to solve the problem all together.
Finally, the current viaduct is dangerous. Numerous experiements have proven that it is likely to collapse in an earthquake. A safe and effective alternative is necessary.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Veronica Martin
Veronica Martin
Martin takes a personal approach to her education and hopes to further her personal interests through the education received at Seattle University.
It was a toss up between Seattle U and Chapman in Orange, California. In retrospect she feels that the schools are polar opposite and is happy with the decision to attend S.U.
Martin has, however, discovered that Journalism promotes relationship with people that is forced and relies on the “what’s in it for me?” approach. She does not feel comfortable looking at friends as potential stories and would like to lead her life in a different manner.
Martin takes a personal approach to her education and hopes to further her personal interests through the education received at Seattle University.
It was a toss up between Seattle U and Chapman in Orange, California. In retrospect she feels that the schools are polar opposite and is happy with the decision to attend S.U.
Martin has, however, discovered that Journalism promotes relationship with people that is forced and relies on the “what’s in it for me?” approach. She does not feel comfortable looking at friends as potential stories and would like to lead her life in a different manner.
Socrates Interpretation
Seattle University is divided over the transition to Division One basketball. The impending change to Division One has students taking sides, either for the transition or against it.
Let us apply the following Socrates proverb to the Division One transition. “The root of education is bitter, but sweet are its fruits.” Some, like Alyss Tsukayama, feel that placing more emphasis on sports could impede her education.
“I feel that Seattle University has a great reputation for high qualities of education, and that is why I chose this school over others that spent more money on sports,” she says.
Tsukayama could be onto something—or missing the point--when juxtaposing Socrates’ stance on bitter and sweet. Her fears and anticipation about Seattle University putting more stock in Division One sports might end up improving the academic experiences for students.
Seattle University basketball coach Gweth talks about the unexpected winning season for his team.
“We came out of nowhere and ended up traveling thousands of miles this season,” he says. “My team goes out on the court and is winning—without the attitude of other teams.”
Taking the time to work, practice and sneak-in might give Seattle U the winning edge. After all, it is easier to win as the expected underdog, without the pressures of previous success.
Because change can harbor resistance, the quote from Socrates could lend a helping hand to those concerned about Seattle University. All anyone can really do s wait and see. This difficult time of transition could end up reaping rewards of improved education from increased finances granted to the school.
Let us apply the following Socrates proverb to the Division One transition. “The root of education is bitter, but sweet are its fruits.” Some, like Alyss Tsukayama, feel that placing more emphasis on sports could impede her education.
“I feel that Seattle University has a great reputation for high qualities of education, and that is why I chose this school over others that spent more money on sports,” she says.
Tsukayama could be onto something—or missing the point--when juxtaposing Socrates’ stance on bitter and sweet. Her fears and anticipation about Seattle University putting more stock in Division One sports might end up improving the academic experiences for students.
Seattle University basketball coach Gweth talks about the unexpected winning season for his team.
“We came out of nowhere and ended up traveling thousands of miles this season,” he says. “My team goes out on the court and is winning—without the attitude of other teams.”
Taking the time to work, practice and sneak-in might give Seattle U the winning edge. After all, it is easier to win as the expected underdog, without the pressures of previous success.
Because change can harbor resistance, the quote from Socrates could lend a helping hand to those concerned about Seattle University. All anyone can really do s wait and see. This difficult time of transition could end up reaping rewards of improved education from increased finances granted to the school.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Hook-Up Culture
Hook-Up Culture –Jack Grimes
It seems, for me, that Grimes shifts back and forth between acceptable evidence and fallacy. He touches on an aspect of commitment and power that I find interesting. According to Grimes, hooking up is easier and less vulnerable than having a relationship, but those involved gain a great sense of power.
First, he explains that power is involved in the act of sexual intimacy. And that nothing is more powerful than feeling the “liveliness” of sex between two people. Something very “powerful” is achieved when consensual sex is practiced. In my opinion, the generation of which Grimes speaks is one that often seeks power without extensive work. More than every, people—especially the youth—are celebrity obsessed and want to live the life of Britney Spears without working for it. This is not to say that many, many people aspire and achieve through hard work, but it only takes a few minutes of watching MTV to validate my point.
Maybe our college-aged youth find hooking up so appealing because of that power aspect Grimes mentioned. After all, hooking up requires little emotional work and only physical vulnerability is needed. If someone hooks up with another for the night, his or her relationship is based on only a few hours of commitment. Therefore it is much easier to accomplish than trying to forge ahead with a traditional relationship, which required a great deal of work and compromise.
Grimes also noted what hooking up is about “…holding back, not giving one’s self, not committing.” This ties into the vulnerability aspect discussed earlier. It takes a level of commitment and maturity to let one’s self become vulnerable and allow another person a level of power.
Grimes did note that he finds the notion of sexual and powerful women “strange.” I think this does nothing to further his claims and most likely will distract his target audience, leaving some of his other claims in the dust. He calls women that hook up prostitutes, while not referring to men in the same way. This is not a fair and balanced explanation of both sides. If one is powerful, then so is the other.
It seems, for me, that Grimes shifts back and forth between acceptable evidence and fallacy. He touches on an aspect of commitment and power that I find interesting. According to Grimes, hooking up is easier and less vulnerable than having a relationship, but those involved gain a great sense of power.
First, he explains that power is involved in the act of sexual intimacy. And that nothing is more powerful than feeling the “liveliness” of sex between two people. Something very “powerful” is achieved when consensual sex is practiced. In my opinion, the generation of which Grimes speaks is one that often seeks power without extensive work. More than every, people—especially the youth—are celebrity obsessed and want to live the life of Britney Spears without working for it. This is not to say that many, many people aspire and achieve through hard work, but it only takes a few minutes of watching MTV to validate my point.
Maybe our college-aged youth find hooking up so appealing because of that power aspect Grimes mentioned. After all, hooking up requires little emotional work and only physical vulnerability is needed. If someone hooks up with another for the night, his or her relationship is based on only a few hours of commitment. Therefore it is much easier to accomplish than trying to forge ahead with a traditional relationship, which required a great deal of work and compromise.
Grimes also noted what hooking up is about “…holding back, not giving one’s self, not committing.” This ties into the vulnerability aspect discussed earlier. It takes a level of commitment and maturity to let one’s self become vulnerable and allow another person a level of power.
Grimes did note that he finds the notion of sexual and powerful women “strange.” I think this does nothing to further his claims and most likely will distract his target audience, leaving some of his other claims in the dust. He calls women that hook up prostitutes, while not referring to men in the same way. This is not a fair and balanced explanation of both sides. If one is powerful, then so is the other.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Letter to the Editor
Guantanamo Bay
On his first full day in office, President Obama ordered the closure Guantanamo Bay. This displays, for me, that Obama’s actions are coinciding with his words early on in his presidency. Lofty promises were spewed during this most lengthy campaign and I almost tuned out his hopeful rhetoric. Not because I disliked Obama or didn’t trust him, instead because our government has reacted so poorly and too many promises were abandoned.
To his credit, former President Bush did follow through on certain policies, but I don’t think they were in line with what his people wanted. He made pact to stop terrorism, yet he condoned torture and the killing of thousands of innocent people in Iraq.
The closure of Guantanamo Bay says that the U.S. is ready to lead again. And, our leader is prepared to do so in a lawful and humane manner. It is time for our government to follow the constitution and international laws. Because, after all, war does not constitute betrayal of international expectations and does not give global governance to one leader.
I realize that the process of closing prison camps can be lengthy and arduous, but I also understand that just taking the step toward ending torture is more telling than the time it will take to disband Guantanamo.
Being a large and powerful country, U.S. leaders should set an example for the rest of the world. This may sound idealistic, however if terrorism is illegal in the U.S., it should not be executed in our camps. I praise Obama for acting so quickly and ending tempering the level of hypocrisy our government has displayed for so many years.
On his first full day in office, President Obama ordered the closure Guantanamo Bay. This displays, for me, that Obama’s actions are coinciding with his words early on in his presidency. Lofty promises were spewed during this most lengthy campaign and I almost tuned out his hopeful rhetoric. Not because I disliked Obama or didn’t trust him, instead because our government has reacted so poorly and too many promises were abandoned.
To his credit, former President Bush did follow through on certain policies, but I don’t think they were in line with what his people wanted. He made pact to stop terrorism, yet he condoned torture and the killing of thousands of innocent people in Iraq.
The closure of Guantanamo Bay says that the U.S. is ready to lead again. And, our leader is prepared to do so in a lawful and humane manner. It is time for our government to follow the constitution and international laws. Because, after all, war does not constitute betrayal of international expectations and does not give global governance to one leader.
I realize that the process of closing prison camps can be lengthy and arduous, but I also understand that just taking the step toward ending torture is more telling than the time it will take to disband Guantanamo.
Being a large and powerful country, U.S. leaders should set an example for the rest of the world. This may sound idealistic, however if terrorism is illegal in the U.S., it should not be executed in our camps. I praise Obama for acting so quickly and ending tempering the level of hypocrisy our government has displayed for so many years.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
The Aesthetic Imperative
The Aesthetic Imperative –Postrel
Postrel claims that we (as humans) are drawn to aesthetics because it feels natural and motivational, instead of forced. She says that we demand things and have expectations of stores, businesses, etc to look a certain way. She also claims that we—now more than ever—are educated and place higher expectations on innovators.
Instead of feeling good about something, Postrel says that we are drawn to things because of good design. “That design makes sense” is something she feels would motivate a purchase as opposed to evoking a warm and fuzzy feeling.
Postrel claims that we expect things to look good and that designs make sense. Not only should the display at target “flow,” but also the items on the display look a certain way. This, Postrel feels, is a result our demands.
We are more educated than ever and our expectations are ever increasing, Postrel says. And, as a result, company ceo’s and designers have to work harder to create products to meet our needs.
Great design used to be an opulence enjoyed by the elite. Now, with lower-end retail stores offering “designer looking” items, it is accessible to everyone. This does not mean that design—or concept—has been dumbed down. Instead, it is more utilized and thoughtful.
Think about it: People have been looking to Martha Stewart for inspiration for 25-years, and now we can purchase look-alike items at Macy’s for a fraction of what she paid for the original. Stewart’s retail displays at Macy’s mimic her own home, giving a feeling of opulence and organization. Then, on those displays are beautiful—and inexpensive—items that have been unattainable for the masses until now.
I think that visual/tactile aesthetic is a good thing. But, keep in mind that it can be another marketing tactic. For example, people wear Ed Hardy because it looks original and messy, but it comes at a price. His t-shirts can run upward of $100. Those who purchase his clothing feel original and not manipulated, but should think again because the sparkly displays are aesthetically pleasing and a great marketing tool.
Postrel claims that we (as humans) are drawn to aesthetics because it feels natural and motivational, instead of forced. She says that we demand things and have expectations of stores, businesses, etc to look a certain way. She also claims that we—now more than ever—are educated and place higher expectations on innovators.
Instead of feeling good about something, Postrel says that we are drawn to things because of good design. “That design makes sense” is something she feels would motivate a purchase as opposed to evoking a warm and fuzzy feeling.
Postrel claims that we expect things to look good and that designs make sense. Not only should the display at target “flow,” but also the items on the display look a certain way. This, Postrel feels, is a result our demands.
We are more educated than ever and our expectations are ever increasing, Postrel says. And, as a result, company ceo’s and designers have to work harder to create products to meet our needs.
Great design used to be an opulence enjoyed by the elite. Now, with lower-end retail stores offering “designer looking” items, it is accessible to everyone. This does not mean that design—or concept—has been dumbed down. Instead, it is more utilized and thoughtful.
Think about it: People have been looking to Martha Stewart for inspiration for 25-years, and now we can purchase look-alike items at Macy’s for a fraction of what she paid for the original. Stewart’s retail displays at Macy’s mimic her own home, giving a feeling of opulence and organization. Then, on those displays are beautiful—and inexpensive—items that have been unattainable for the masses until now.
I think that visual/tactile aesthetic is a good thing. But, keep in mind that it can be another marketing tactic. For example, people wear Ed Hardy because it looks original and messy, but it comes at a price. His t-shirts can run upward of $100. Those who purchase his clothing feel original and not manipulated, but should think again because the sparkly displays are aesthetically pleasing and a great marketing tool.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)