ONION TACOS: Politics
This Website / Blog belongs to Dora M. Dominguez-Carey 2005: Background Template: Dora's Diary 1; by Dora Dominguez Carey 2014: Dominguez Generations, Inc. 2005;

✔©✔

✔©✔
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Dora's Corner: Undocumented Immigrants: They Should Do What?!!

Okay, it is time for me to get on my almighty soapbox, but believe me, this rant is well worth my time in writing it, and hopefully the time of whatever audience this blog generates.
While waiting for a meeting with a professor, I overheard the prof talking to a student, actually, the prof was tutoring (or trying to tutor) the student.  The topic that they were reviewing from the student's essay involved undocumented immigrants.  The student kept referring to them as "illegals" while the prof kept trying to get the student to change the wording.  Regardless of the student's lack of empathy for the negative and difficult position which undocumented works find themselves, she should have at least refrained from using such derogatory language for the academic audience for which essays are written...
The student argued with the prof on several stances.  The prof was getting agitated, but I have to give the prof high praises for keeping her cool and still getting her point across.  The prof was merely trying to explain the rhetorical method and proper writer's craft to the student, but the student was too hell bent on insisting that: "those illegals need to go back to Mexico"..."they are mooching off the government"..."they are taking all the welfare benefits from Americans that need them" (BTW, dear student, people from Mexico are Americans)...and lastly, the most typical, over-used, and incorrectly used assumption: "those illegals are taking jobs from us in the United States."
The student is suffering from a naivete that I won't even try to justify with a reply or a debate.  The student needs to read about the causal effects and why she needs to avoid the rhetorical fallacy, hasty generalization, personal attack/loss of audience, questionable authority, false analogy, either or fallacy, red herring, slippery slope, stereotyping...all the wrong things that one should avoid while writing in the cause and effect mode, well, this student managed to incorrectly include many of the "don't(s)" in her essay.  No wonder the prof seemed a bit perturbed when she tried to explain what the student was doing wrong (the student hardly did anything correct, it seems), and how to fix it for an academic audience, but the student was not listening.
It took a lot for me to keep quiet.  I wanted to lash out at the student for incorrectly stereo-typing the undocumented immigrants because there is more behind why people from Mexico are in the United States.  The area is vastly gray; however, the student just saw black and white (another incorrect process in an essay).  The other thing that upset me was how the student kind of disrespected the professor.  I like this professor; she has taught me a lot, and I have enjoyed our conversations in and outside of class.  I respect the professor because she has gone to college and put in her time towards becoming an educator; she has earned the right to be respected and treated well.  The prof is younger than I am, but that does not matter to me...she should be respected.  She never disrespects others - even when other people act like asses.  Another reason I stayed quiet was the obvious, the conversation was between a professor and a student, and did not include me.  I mainly stayed silent in respect for the professor - not the lame student, with the one-sided point of view that had no rhyme or logic to whatever rhetorical mode she was incorrectly trying to argue.  Give me a fucking break, ignorant student.  
BTW, I can use the personal attack...it's my blog, and I'll attack if I want to.  #ROTFLMAO!

Friday, November 7, 2014

Dora's Corner: Rock the Vote: Voting Goes Awry…More Like Vote Missed the Rock.

Well, the National Mid-Term election returns were a bit unsettling this past Tuesday (Nov 6, 2014); however, here in the great state of Texas, things were not so disturbing only because politics and voting remained status quo.  In other words, the “good ole boy network” won in a (landslide victory) by securing a statewide triumph for all republican candidates.  Yes, the “good ole boy network" was at its best slinging mud and spewing untruths about Democratic candidates in order to demagogue their way towards ensuring that every single Republican/Tea Party candidate was victorious over any Democratic candidate.  Sadly, any Democratic candidate who dared try to run against his or her cronie-conservative counterpart was found on the losing side of these mid-terms, and that includes the one and only Wendy Davis who ran in the gubernatorial race.  I canvassed for her, did the grassroots collaborating for her, and did the door-to-door politicking for Davis, but it was all done to no avail.  Nonetheless, I would do the same thing even if I had a crystal ball advance warning that Davis was going to lose.  Regardless of how many percentage points that Davis lost by (and I had the pre-warning via a crystal ball), I would have still supported Davis and canvassed for her.  I subscribe to the “paradox of participation” because I firmly believe that all qualified persons (VAP/VEP) should have a moral obligation embedded within themselves to vote.  Voting should not only be viewed as one’s civil obligation, but it should be something one wants to do regardless of what the turn-out might be.  For example, here in Texas, Democratic or Third-Party candidates seldom have a chance to win versus the Conservative-crew, but it does not mean that the Democratic Party (or Third-Party i.e. “La RAZA”) does not pursue to elect its own candidate to represent their respective Party, their ideals, and their platform.  To conclude, despite any political party not having a chance to have their candidate elected does not mean that a member of that political party should not vote.  One always needs to vote; strong Democrats were always going to vote for Wendy Davis regardless of the polls or rumor mill that had her losing to Abbott by a substantial margin.  Rock the vote means exactly what it states, one must shake up the very structure of voting in order to impact the turn-out and the way politicians make choices for us their constituents.  Bottom line, if one does not vote…one does not get the right to bitch.