Bad Paragraph: The jumping Kangaroo was running fast past the slow tortoise while the hot brush fire was pushing up against the animals, and it was driving them out of their homes. The bright lightening had begun the fire when the quick lightening hit the dry brush. The fire was spreading. Flames were sending smoke into the air.

Bad Paragraph Edited: This paragraph has too many "to be" verbs. Several descriptions are obvious: Kangaroos generally jump, tortoises are almost always slow, lightening is always bright, flames always send smoke into the air. The writing could improve by replacing the to be verbs with more active and specific verbs. The paragraph could also benefit from stating less of the obvious.

Better Paragraph: The tortoise stared at the kangaroo as it sped past him into the shadows. Lightening had ignited the brush several hours earlier causing animals to flee to safety. The brush exploded like a tinder box under a match and the flames spread like water from a broken dam. Precipitation had always been scarce, but this year's rainfall record didn't even have one drop to add to its ledger book.

While this paragraph isn't picture perfect, it improves on the first paragraph by implementing the editing suggestions.

Each player lists 6 facts/habits about themselves.

I was tagged by my older sister, Chantal.


Six Facts about myself:

1. I want to ride a camel and an elephant some day.
2. I can turn my innie belly button into an outie. (Chantal, you probably didn't even know that one!)
3. I have commitment problems.
4. I'm extremely gullible.
5. I had surgery on my lip.
6. I like to be crazy; The bus system in El Sal is run privately by individuals that can get a hold of a beat up, old school bus from the United States. Bus owners ruthlessly compete for customers. The way it works is one guy drives like a maniac while the other guy jumps off at the bus stops to recruit potential patrons. (You should see these guys jumping off while the bus is speeding down the road. It's gotta become an Olympic sport one of these days.) At times, it can be chaotic on the sidewalks when recruiters are trying to shout above their competitors.

The guys that owned the bus Sadie and I got onto that night tricked us; they told us they were going to our stop when they really weren't going directly there. After an hour and a half, Sadie and I were the only ones left on the bus. I was getting really bored, and I was tired after a full day of work, so I just wanted to get home. Eventually, I decided that since there was nothing we could do about our situation, I wanted a good laugh. I told Sadie to get ready with her camera because I had a sweet plan. I decided to ask the guy if I could jump off the bus with him and yell at potential customers to get on his bus. I figured he couldn't say no from a business perspective because how could a white girl jumping off the bus as a recruiter not attract attention in a diversity-less country? So this kid who was younger than me smirked and told me what to say to the customers when I jumped off.

I think Sadie had the best time laughing, but I had the second best time just hanging out of the door with the wind in my face and jumping off the bus before it stopped and yelling at the people on the sidewalk. The expressions of the El Salvadorians was just what I was hoping for--they were totally at a loss of what to do. It was worth the memory and worth the laughs.

So I'm getting a job. I'm pretty excited about it. It's hard to find a paid editing job around these parts. Lots of girls at BYU are editing minors; so the market is saturated. So my parents aren't going to be too thrilled with this decision. There reasoning is legit: In my college career, there have only been two terms I haven't worked. I've done really well both times, especially the second time. So working takes a toll on my grades, and my parents don't want me to work this semester. It's true my schedule doesn't have space for twenty hours a week to work.

I'm already pretty spread thin in my schedule as it is, but hear me out. (1) I need the experience; if I don't have experience in the editing field, I can't get a job. If I can't get a job, I can't support myself. A little sacrifice on the grades will result in a job. I think that's pretty argument on the side of getting a job. (2) I need the money; I haven't had a job that actually paid me in solid cash--not amenities--in three years. My parents might think that if I want to go to Grad school, I need better grades. They would be right. BUT my rebuttal would be, education isn't all about grades. Life itself is education too. Real world experience sometimes gives you more of an education than formal education. My parents might think I am going to squander the money I make. (I have been labeled their most worldly child.) Hopefully someday I can convince them I am a little better with my money today then I was in high school. That's all for today.

In El Salvador, I experienced what it was like to be a minority. With few groups besides the mixed European/Indian blood, we stood out like a strawberry in the middle of grapes. I don't think I've ever been in a less diverse place. People don't go to El Salvador because there isn't much of a draw to go there--no vacation spots, no capital for businesses. I went down speaking maybe a handful of Spanish words--agua, hola, como esta, and the like. I didn't even know what Los Hermanos meant until I was in El Salvador for a couple of days. While I was picking up on the language relatively fast, it was always a relief to find someone once in a while who spoke English. I relished the opportunity to communicate more when someone could offer it. People were patient with my inadequate Spanish speaking abilities.

Coming back to the United States was a shock for me in many ways. One way in particular was when I was in line at Cafe Rio with my old companion Sister Salazar. I started talking to the guy behind the counter in Spanish; I was so proud of my newly developed skills and was excited to talk to the workers in Spanish. A guy behind me said, "Don't promote them talking in Spanish; they're here, and they should speak English." I was furious. I was mad because I had just been a non-native speaking minority, and I knew how hard it was hard to be in that position. Who's to say these people weren't trying? And did he know what a relief it was every once in a while to have someone speak to you in your native tongue? I was ticked at his ignorance. If he had ever studied immigration patterns, he'd know people loose their native tongue in a couple generations anyway.

In the University forum today with Chief Justice Roberts, I was impressed with how aware he was of his audience. He started his speech by making a joke about not making lawyer jokes to mixed audiences; the lawyers don't find them funny, and the non-lawyers think they're true. Then the Chief Justice weaved various references to prior devotionals at BYU; experiences with members he had had during his law profession; and historical vignettes about experiences with the Mormon people. He referenced President and Sister Samuelson's devotional about the importance of the constitution. He talked about his experience arguing in front of the supreme court against Rex Lee (and loosing 9-0; ouch, that left an impression).

Although I tried to muster all of the interest I possibly could in his topic--the workings of the constitution, and its amendments--I wasn't sucked in by his speech. Regardless of how enrapt I was by his subject, he presented well his topic to his audience. His tone stayed the same throughout his presentation. It was more formal, but not so formal that I felt a disconnect with him as a person. He also remained consistent with his stance. He addressed the topic in the same light throughout his speech. He embellished his stance by adding that not only did he love the Constitution but he especially loved the third article (the article which talks about the importance of the Supreme Court . . . in a way he was being facetious). Good job Chief Justice Roberts.

Sunday I left my cell phone at a friend's house. I was totally excited to be free of it for a while because I was excited to take a short break from my crazy life. It was fun not having it for about two days, but now the excitement of being disconnected from my life has been replaced by the reality of the situation. I admit, I miss talking to people.

Monday I went to FHE and ran into a guy I haven't seen in forever. It was kind of an interesting re-acquaintance in light of the terms we left off last time we talked. But we've become friends. The sweet thing is, since he's a professional snowboarder, he is totally hooking me up with with a thirty dollar snowboard on his friends and family discount. How nice is that?

Tuesday is always the most insane day of the week for me--class after class with barely enough time to breath. The coolest part about my Tuesdays, though, is that I get to watch old movies. I am taking an American film class, and we get to watch old movies. This Tuesday I watched Sergeant York, and it was totally inspiring.

Wednesday was a great day. Be proud of me, I went running at an insanely early time so that I could work on my awesome English 213 paper ;) I am SOOOO happy to be running again. This was my fourth time after surgery. I won't mention the state of my running conditioning, but I will say, I'm finally running; that's exciting.

Today was awesome because I found out I might be able to go to a Conference in San Francisco this March for a paper I have written. The sad part is that it might cost four hundred dollars. Do I have that type of cash? Nope! But apparently the college of Humanities might be able to give me a little over half of that. In light of how awesome this opportunity is, I might just have to go and pay the loot.

In light of the peer reviewing, I need to change my enthymeme. My original enthymeme was: The current Utah voucher plan will exclude the poorest students from higher quality education in a competitive educational marked because the current Utah voucher plan will not provide sufficient monetary means for the poorest students to attend any school of their choice in a competitive educational market. As we peer reviewed, I realized that the voucher system could possibly provide a better quality education for the poorest students; however, the Utah voucher system does not provide equal opportunity for the poorest students to have access to the most expensive education, which is often assumed to be the best education.

The point of the voucher program is to improve education. I believe the voucher system would improve education; however, the playing field is not even: the poorest students would not have all of the options all of the other students above them would have with the edition of vouchers. They would need to be given more money in order to have all of the options the other students have. My enthymeme also errs because there is an assumption here that might be invalid. Most people in America think that the private school sector has better quality education than the public school sector. I need to find out if this assumption is actually valid. If private schools have better education than public school systems, then in order for this voucher system to be a fair system, all students would need to have the option of attending private schools.

As I've researched vouchers, I find pros and cons on both sides of the argument. In theory I like Milton Friedman's 1955 proposal for vouchers. Economically it makes sense in theory. Why not make education an open market? By making education an open market, schools will compete among each other to produce better education. This theory makes sense in a capitalistic society which finds positive results in an open market with its businesses, but businesses are regulated, and the laws that apply to the business world are complex and honed resulting in less potential mishaps unlike the current theories and structures of the proposed voucher system.

I went to El Salvador two summers ago. Their bus system was a competitive market. Buses were owned by individuals looking to make money, and as a result, the buses drove like maniacs so they could get to the next bus stop to collect the people before the other bus drivers and make money. In this unregulated, dangerous system, owners cut corners resulting in more harm to the public than good. This competitive market for the bus systems isn't a bad idea, it just hasn't been worked through enough to benefit the people the bus system serves as much as it could. Likewise, I think the voucher system is a raw idea in need of some serious fine tuning. The intended result will not be the actual result if we continue to implement the voucher system as is.

I’ve been thinking about how much I love this stage of life; I love how great my parents are; I love how awesome my siblings are; I love my room roommate; in fact, I love all my roommates; I love my major; I love my schedule; I love being at BYU; I love meeting the most random and cool people ever at this university; I love that it’s still warm outside; I love how my life is so fluid—I can do anything I want at any time I want.

I was thinking this weekend about Nantucket. This place is a classic love in my life. Every summer while I was growing up, we would spend a week down on the island. By the time we were done, we’d be wind blown, burnt to a crisp, and vacationed out. Some years we were out in the sun so much I actually almost looked blond. I never used to put on sun screen; my mentality at the time—why would I want to take the time to put on sun screen when I could be out in the waves body surfing? Heck no. We’d body surf the waves all day long. One time we went to Nantucket the week after a hurricane. It was pretty sweet. The waves were near impossible, but that was the fun of it. We’d be tossed like rag dolls in a washing machine. Those were the days. Man, all this nostalgia is getting to me; I’ve got to get back there and ride those waves again.

On the proponent side of the Utah voucher system, a minority group argues against the stance of the NAACP Salt Lake City branch. The NAACP is saying that the average per year tuition for a private school in Utah is $8000. The Minorities for Vouchers group suggests that this average has been unjustly inflated by expensive school outliers on the graph. The Minorities for Vouchers group suggests that, when you take away these outliers, the average for private schools come to $4,500.

Coming from another angle of this argument, not many private schools would even be available in a voucher system. Many private schools have decided not to accept vouchers, and others that might be affordable would not have the space in their schools to accept many more students. If space is limited in the private school setting, than why include private schools in the open educational market? The reason people want to include private schools in the school options rests on the notion that private schools are actually higher quality education. The question is, is this actually true? Private schools do not have to have certified teachers while public schools do. Private school teachers do not even have to have a bachelor's degree. But, if the perception is that private schools are better, then children will want to move over to private schools if they have the option too. With that type of demand on the private schools, they will draw better teachers to the private sectors as well, leaving the public school system depleted of quality education, and the students that do not have the money to go to the private schools will not have the option for higher education.

I've decided I might want to change my topic from desegregation legislation to no child left behind. I was talking to my friend who is a teacher in Arizona. She teaches a class full of minority children. She was telling me how she has to have all of her children up to their third grade reading level by the end of this year. Apparently there are some provisions in the no child left behind legislation that will take away funding from the school systems if all of the children are not up to their reading level by the end of the year. While this is a great idea in theory, she was explaining to me that this is a difficult task for her. Only four students out of her whole third grade class are up to the reading level they should be attaining. This means she has to have the other twenty-eight up to par in six months. This is an added challenge because few, if any, of these children speak English at home. They have little to no help from their parents.

My Enthymeme for the no child left behind law would be something to the effect of--The no child left behind law does not stimulate growth in low-income school systems because the no child left behind law will take money away from failing schools that need the funds to improve their quality of education.

Ever since high school, I've had these random heart beats. It generally only happens once a year-ish. It's become more regular recently, and so when I went home for my surgery this summer, I had an EEG and EKG done. They told me what I already knew; I had a heart murmur, but it was nothing serious, and my heart walls are normal. I was still a little disconcerted about this result because I had been having these random heart beats more frequently. I ended up going to have a 24-hour holder monitor--nothing. Of course, the 24 hours I wore this machine, nothing of import happened--my heart only skipped a couple beats. I would be fine with that out come if these random heart beats hadn't been increasing like crazy these past few weeks since the 24 hour monitor. They've been pretty intense and consistent--more than I've ever had these random palpitations in the past.

I only have one hypothesis: I haven't been as physically inactive as I have been over this past year since . . . I was a baby? With my surgery this past summer and a sprained ankle last fall, my workouts have been limited. So my solution to this problem is to start working my heart out. If it's just a weak heart, it can always be strengthened.

I was thinking about writing on education reform on an undergraduate level, but I haven't been able to find more than two quality sources of research for my paper. This is also a problem because both sources are written by the same author. So I'm thinking about going with another topic--desegregation in the school systems. This idea was sparked by a writer's conference I went too. The keynote speaker talked about a book he wrote on Emmitt Till. The author went down to research his book in the Mississippi Delta where the events with Emmitt had transpired. He mentioned something in passing that caught my attention. He mentioned how he walked into the public schools to talk with local people about their knowledge of the events. He described how the school system still seemed like it was segregated regardless of all the legislation that had been passed on desegregation.

I looked up a few articles on contemporary desegregation, and to my surprise I found out many judges today are reversing the desegregation standards that have been in practice the past half a century. Judges throughout the country are ruling for local schools to take in their local neighborhood kids. The problem is in many of these areas the white kids are now predominantly in one school, and the minorities are predominantly in another. It was counter-intuitive to me, however, that several of the parents of the minority children were arguing that the desegregation legislation had served its purpose, and now, they believe that by getting rid of the desegregation legislation, their children will perform better if the legislation is over-turned. A good WATCO for this would be WATCO over-turning desegregation legislation on the academic performance of minorities in the American school system?

So how did I do with my last enthymeme? Well, I ended up re-enthymeming. (Yes, I am making this word up.) I did justify not going with thinking about my exercising from another angle. In the morning, I thought to myself: WATCO going to exercise, when I am sick and didn't get any sleep last night, on my health? Since health is ultimately my goal with exercising, and going to exercise when I didn't get any sleep would just exacerbate my antithesis of health condition, I decided not to go. My re-enthymeming in the early hours of the morning led to this: Exercising while I am sick without getting any sleep the night before will decrease my health because exercising while I am sick without getting any sleep the night before will exhaust my body of the energy my body needs to repair itself. The implicit assumption: whatever will exhaust my body of the energy my body needs to repair itself also decreases my health.

Is this really the case? I don't know. I knew a man who insisted that exercising while sick was important because it sped up the recovery process. Speeding up the recovery process might mean that the individual exercising would get worse before they got better. I would have to do more research to support my enthymeme since there is still doubt about it, but that means it could be a good enthymeme because it is controversial.

I'm feeling sick today and am trying to argue myself into exercising tomorrow morning. The argument to myself starts off with WATCO not exercising tomorrow morning? I am trying to convince myself that: By not exercising tomorrow morning I will develop a habit of not exercising in the morning because by not exercising tomorrow morning I will subconsciously breakdown my willpower to get out of bed in the morning to exercise. I think this is fair to conclude: anything that subconsciously breaks down my willpower to get out of bed in the morning to exercise also develops a habit of not exercising in the morning.

I continue to argue this point with myself as I cite all of the times I have let habits break in the past; it always starts with one time. I think my argument to myself has plenty of ethos--I know all the times I have successfully broken habits. I also have some pathos in here; I don't want to disappoint myself by breaking under the desire to sleep in. This pathos involves guilt: I will feel guilty if I sleep in and start to break down this great habit. The logos in this argument is that it makes sense that in order to break a habit you must start somewhere small--one day at a time . . . tomorrow will only tell what will actually happen. Hopefully my enthymeme and argument will be strong enough to get me out of bed when I don't want to get up.

Nighthawks was painted post-Pearl Harbor bombing. The city is sleek, giving a distant, cold feel. The idea that no one is on the Manhattan street at night is counter-intuitive. The deliberate omission of people, animals, and trash from the street displays a very desolate city. Little interaction, if any, is happening among the people at this diner. The isolation of individuals is indicative of the feeling of this time period. There is no visible exit from this diner inducing a feeling of confinement in the viewer. Although bright colors are used in this painting, it is a bleak setting.

After this historical introduction, it is easier to conclude the 'WATCO'. WATCO the Pearl Harbor bombing on the American people during the war? The audience is fairly broad; American adults. To tighten the audience group, we could specify city dwelling adults; this painting would probably resonate with people that are most familiar with its context. My Enthymeme: The bombing of Pearl Harbor severely impaired the morale of American citizens because the bombing of Pearl Harbor was a devastating attack on the American Military. Implicit assumption: Anything that is a devastating attack on the American Military also severely impairs the morale of the American citizens. Ethos: The painter, Hopper, grew up in Manhattan and knows the cities layout; through this he was able to distort it appropriately in order to get his point across to his audience. Pathos: The emotional disconnect in this painting among the diner patrons is easily discernible by the viewer. Logos: When you look at the diner from this vantage point, there is no exit for neither the patrons nor the bar tender. This logical conclusion yields the desired mentality for the painter.

The argument is sufficient. Enough supporting evidence of the argument is found in the painting. The process which leads up to the final point is typical; the audience can logically follow the flow of the argument. This is a well done argument. The only draw back revolves around the fact that the effect of this painting would be lost to some extent on an individual who has no idea about the historical context of this painting.

Nighthawks (1942 (120 Kb); Oil on canvas, 30 x 60 in; The Art Institute of Chicago)

Hmmm . . . what to write about. I'm a little fried right now, so I think I have a great excuse to do a free write. Tuesdays are one of my busiest days: I have a night class that is four hours long; yeah. It's not intense, just draining. As I was walking home, I checked my phone and noticed I had missed two calls. I knew the first person that had called, but I had no idea who this second person was. Of course, I called back this mystery number to figure out who the individual was. It rings several times and then--all I could do was laugh a solid outloud laugh--the message machine came on in all its glory. I can't do the recording any justice, but I will say it caught me off gaurd to the point where I was laughing hard enough that I knew, from all the looks I was getting, that the people around me were soooo jealous of the funny message I was listening too . . .

I love laughing. It is the most theraputic remedy out there. Reader's Digest has it right; laughter is the best medicine. That's all.

Before we walked into the health food bakery in Kent, Ohio, my companion told me I had to guess how old Maurice Drake was. The bells jangled as we walked through the front door of the bakery. The owner stepped out from the back of the bakery and introduced himself in a slightly raspy voice. Besides having an incredible presence about him, Maurice was a tall, built man, about six foot four inches. Under my estimation, regardless of the feeling I had that he hadn't had much sleep the night before, he looked like he was in top physical health. I couldn't find a wrinkle on his face; his skin looked firm and healthy. Twenty-nine was my first guess. Wrong, guess again. He couldn't be over thirty-five. Salzie laughed at my guess--wrong--Maurice Drake was in his fifties! I was in shock. What was his trick? Throughout this paper we will explore Maurice's health tactics and how they affect the body.

This introduction is aimed at an audience interested in health and beauty. The audience can be both male and female, even though it discusses a male example at the beginning. I would guess the audience would be a young adult to middle aged individual who is attracted to topics on physical health.

WATCO of consistent exercise and living a vegetarian lifestyle on the body?

My enthymeme for this introduction is: Living a vegetarian lifestyle complete with daily exercise strengthens the body's constitution against the expansion of incapacitating years because living a vegetarian lifestyle complete with daily exercise maintains muscles, increases the body's metabolic rate, and strengthens the body's immune system.

The implicit assumtion in this enthymeme is: Anything that maintains muscles, increases the body's metabolic rate, and strengthens the body's immune system, also strengthens the body's constitution against the expansion of incapacitating years. I feel like this implicit assumption is easy for the reader to agree with.

I went to the Cingular store and met David, the representative. My brother and I were his audience. We came to look at options for a family plan in hopes of saving money. My sister, Chantal, also potentially wants to be included on this plan if it will save her money.

So his Watco question was "What are the consequences of switching from single plans to family plans on saving money for Chantal, Vincent, and Ginette?" His enthymeme was, "Switching to a family plan will reduce Chantal, Vincent, and Ginette's individual monthly bills because switching to a family plan will decrease the cost of their overall bill."

The implicit assumption is, "Whatever will decrease the cost of the overall bill will also reduce Chantal, Vincent, and Ginette's individual monthly bills." This assumption is solid because it is indisputable; the audience would completely agree with the assumption.

For David to build clout in our eyes, he told us how long he had worked for the company and proved his claim by being able to answer our random and extremely specific questions. David walked us through everything logically to show us what a great choice it would be to upgrade to a family plan. He did not at anytime try to draw on our emotions; he knew his audience well.

David's argument offered sufficient evidence to support his claim. After calculating out the highest possible monthly bill and dividing the bill in thirds, he showed us that we would be paying less on our monthly bill than we are paying now if we were to buy a family plan. David's argument was typical; he showed us step-by-step how this decision makes sense according to our objectives. We can't tell if David's argument is accurate yet because it needs to be tested to know if it would prove to be true, but the facts seem to indicate that he is accurate. David's argument was relevant; he didn't try to sell us on anything that had no relevance to the situation. He saw our needs and concerns and addressed those directly without trying to make us do something we didn't want to do. David gets an A from me for being an excellent persuader.

I think we all have little topics we are intrigued by. For me it's stratification. Stratification has occupied my mind for four or five years. My earliest recollection of developing a deeper opinion on the topic dates back to when I was nineteen. I lived with an individual who thought differently than I did about how to assess the value of other people. In this mentality, an individual's value seemed to be based on a coordinating outfit, an expensive purse, money, cars, and physical beauty. Although I disagreed with the perspective that value could be assigned to someone on these factors, for the first time in my life I understood how someone else could come to the conclusion that value was based on something external to character. The more time I spent with my roommate, the more I saw into this paradigm. I had never seen into another vantage point with so much depth before. I began to understand this thought process, and yet I couldn't agree with it, and I still don't.

I'm not saying that what I think is law, but since this is my blog, here's my soap box on stratification (actually it's only a small portion of it). Let's love people on merits of character. Appreciate the paint, but leave the bulk of importance on the integrity of a structure. Here's my dating plug--guys, when you're on dates don't show off what you are going to do for work, whom you are related to, or how much money you have. Those factors shouldn't have any bearing on whether a girl would like you any more or any less than she naturally does. And why should it? If I were a guy, I wouldn't want a girl that would be impressed or unimpressed by insignificant factors. Hmmm . . . I could go on forever; that's all for tonight.