Brandy: Essay 4, Draft
English 101
Mr. Bleck
August 11, 2008
Argument
Many Shades of Green with McCain
This election is going to be different. The first Tuesday in November is quickly approaching. We have been busy with school work, raising children, working full-time, worrying about paying the upcoming power bill, and wondering how we are going to learn all there is to know about the perfect president-to-be before our votes are due. There’s just not enough time to become walking encyclopedias on Election2008, but there is time to heed the advice found in Chapter Eight of Unspun: Finding Facts in a World of Disinformation by Brooks Jackson and Kathleen Hall Jamieson. Jackson and Jamieson tell us that “In our everyday lives we have to pick an appropriate standard.” One appropriate standard we can measure McCain on is his environmental platform. Time isn’t going to allow us to be study for the John McCain vs. Barack Obama test, but we do have time to choose a single topic from our favorite candidate and vote for his ability to excel in one specific area of his position. Let’s measure McCain solely by his environmental platform to see how he lands in front of the competition. McCain’s ideas for The Lexington project are based on well-thought ideas which support the entire community, promote positive changes in the way we think rather than radical expensive changes, and promote economical stimulus and the American way.
McCain captures the entire American community from the environmentalists to the economists, from the scientists to the general tax-payers with The Lexington Project. Though criticized as not being the greenest candidate (Newsweek, 44), his well-thought ideas clean our air, support the American economy, and attach a specific dollar amount to his proposed tax credit along the way. His campaign website (johnmccain.com) shows that his ideas are not for a single, flat green, but rather a complimentary array of shades and intensities of our planet’s favorite color. McCain’s website gives a multi-green proposal to, “commit a $5,000 tax credit for each and every customer who buys a zero carbon emission car, encouraging automakers to be first on the market with these cars in order to capitalize on the consumer incentives.” His plan is so well thought out that he can already put a dollar figure on the tax credit; a beautiful shade of green for the American tax-payer. He then produces a complimentary shade of green for the American economy by supporting automakers, stimulating the economy with incentives to produce clean cars and by creating an economic demand. His third shade of green offering smog-free clean air green specified in “zero-carbon emissions” will have folks breathing in fresh air from Los Angeles to New York. McCain goes on to offer a cash prize for scientific development of an auto battery which will quickly break our dependence on foreign oil. His green ideas are well devised to offer something for everyone.
Unlike Hilary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s seemingly identical Democratic environmental plans, McCain’s plan suggests less radical changes which will offer the general population incentive to increase our greenness. Clinton and Obama both declare a cap and trade system to cut CO2 emissions, increases in fuel efficiency standards, renewable energy to generate electricity, and oppose nuclear power (Newsweek, 44). Clinton’s and Obama’s declarations don’t give any yield to standards, they are merely lines drawn in the sand to make those candidates stand out. None of those declarations support action by the general population, rather they leave all of the control to the governmental bodies to set the caps and administrate a series of mandates. McCain’s positive approach challenges the automakers to devise new clean products including products for use in the public transportation sector. He promotes the scientific industry with a $300 million prize to improve on batteries in those vehicles. He supports the development of flex-fuel vehicles and alternative fuel sources (johnmccain.com). McCain’s ideas involve the general population, the scientists who develop the new technologies, and the industries which buy and manufacture the new products, not solely the government agencies making a cap rule that is subject to being changed or worked around. McCain’s environmental proposal gives the people the power and motivation to develop new solutions which will contribute to economic stimulus, which is more inline with the foundation of the American way.
Benjamin Franklin discovered how to harness electricity then he shared his information with the nation and the world so that others could improve upon it. The Economist cites McCain as having “star power” when it comes to leadership and real-world experience (The Economist, Vol. 385), but it is really McCain’s historical knowledge and experience in the real world that puts him in touch with the nation as a whole. His thinking might be deemed liberal according to many, but isn’t the fact really that his ideas are conservative, based on the original ideas of our forefathers that the President’s role is to promote the American way? Consider the opportunities his plan brings to the table for American business. Universities, businesses, and the average Joe will be scrambling to improve fuel efficiency and competing to win monetary awards by developing the newest fuels and green technologies. Communities will be seeking the latest technologies for implementation in their public transit systems. McCain’s conservatively liberal ideas are what we need to lead the many sectors which make up our nation into a green future.
America’s policy will be different a year from now (Newsweek; April 14, 2008). As Democratic candidates, Clinton and Obama are generally considered to be much more conservative than their Republican counterparts, but conservatism doesn’t mean they will deliver what America needs. Both candidates’ environmental plans sound very promising to wannabe economists who think that spouting numbers actually promises environmental change, but when you look at their proposed changes, it all looks like a bunch of government rhetoric. Caps on emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050, supporting fuel efficiency standards to 55 miles per gallon by 2030, and wanting renewable energy to generate 25% of U.S. electricity by 2025 don’t really mean much to you or I as students, tax-payers, or business people. Read Obama’s website (barackobama.com) and try to decode Obama’s plans to “Crack Down on Excessive Energy Speculation.” Take a close look at McCain’s The Lexington Project and see that he is already calling for automakers to switch more quickly to Flex-Fuel Vehicles than Clinton and Obama have proposed. Rather than spouting numbers McCain is working in the real world and ready to lead the way for the renegotiation of the Kyoto Protocol, an international treaty on global warming which will soon expire.
Time isn’t going to allow us to be study for the John McCain vs. Barack Obama test, but we do have time to choose a single topic from our favorite candidate and vote for his ability to excel in one specific area of his position. Those of us who are unable to become walking encyclopedias on the presidential candidates can take a sure route by strongly supporting a single issue such as a candidate’s environmental platform; especially when a candidate has as strong of an environmental plan as McCain’s. If we select only one reason to vote for McCain, let’s do so in support of the environment, based on his well-thought ideas, his well-backed ideas, and their promise to deliver. Undoubtedly we have a need for change, but some change is too radical for each of us to individually consider. Let’s support McCain, who is supporting America as a whole. Isn’t the role of the American President to support the general population, businesses, scientists, students, and the average Joe? If you agree, then McCain’s environmental platform is enough to have you voting to go green with McCain.
Works Cited
A Whole New McCain; Michael Scherer. Time. New York: Aug 18, 2008. Vol. 172, Iss. 7; pg. 26
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1527521351
American Energy. John McCain 2008. July 30, 2008. http://www.johnmccain.com/
Jackson, Brooks and Kathleen Hall Jamieson. Un-Spun: Finding Facts in a World of Disinformation. New York: Random House, Inc. 2007
United States: The case for John McCain; Lexington; The Economist; London: Dec 8, 2007. Vol. 385, Iss. 8558; pg. 58,
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1394589771
United States: Who is John McCain?; Lexington; The Economist; London: Jun 18, 2005. Vol. 375, Iss. 8431; pg. 48
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=855294971
Who is the Greenest of Them All?; Newsweek; April 14, 2008; pg. 43
- Brandy's blog
- Login or register to post comments
to brandy
The intro works well but could end with something that ties the three points together, such as "and this is what makes McCain the candidate who deserves our vote." Also, be sure to use full names on the first mention of each candidate, or anytime you introduce a person in an essay.
With the first point, save the criticism of McCain for the oppsoing view. Don't distract from the poistive message and argument that is being built. People who don't support McCain on this or other issues might as well be looking for reasons NOT to vote for him, so don't give them any while you are supposed to be singing his praises. Also, McCain's ideas won't clear the air. Ideas don't do anything but lead to practices, policies and the like. Be careful of your language in that respect. If he is elected, and people buy the car because of the tax credit, that will clear the air (the driving of low emission cars). I'm still waiting for my bicycle tax credit for being a zero emission vehicle. I can get a pretty sweet bike for $5k!
The second support paragraph needs to play up McCain rather than talk down Obama and Clinton. That should be saved for the refutation or rebuttal of whatever good Obama and Clinton had proposed. When it comes to cap and trade, because McCain is also proposing that, just talk there about the strengths of his perspective. the merits of the opposing view could include information on Obama supporting something similar, and in the refutation/rebuttal, you will write about why McCain's approach to cap and trade is better than the Obama approach.
A skeptical liberal like myself might wonder why the market, if it is already a pretty fine mechanism for addressing what we need and want and what is good for us, needs a government infusion of cash or other incentives (gist for your opposing view here). Why aren't these people engaging in this research based on possible profits? Is it too expensive? Too much of a long shot? You may not be able to answer these question definitively, but they are the sort of thing someone who disagrees with McCain would expect to be taken into account.
It's also important to clear up a bit of confusion regarding who is a liberal and who is a conservative. The essay states that McCain might be viewed as a liberal by some, but only by the most conservative. Obama and Clinton are both unabashed liberals, not at all conservative, except maybe for Clinton's more hawkish views on the war in Iraq.
What I suggest is to simply the body of the essay in this way: Green McCain point one, Green McCain point two, Green McCain point three and so on. Then the merits of the opposing view--and I suggest focusing on Obama and leaving Clinton out of it because she's out of the race (unless there is some surprise coming at the convention in Denver in a few weeks). It's all about McCain and Obama at this point, so I suggest the essay work with that focus. It also might make for a more effective essay if one paragraph discusses the $300 million incentive to develop the super battery, another to look at the various tax credits and incentives, and what is good about his cap and trade approach.
If you develop the points in this way, I think Franklin and his ideas can be used to drive home the overall point, that there are great men and McCain is one of today's great men and he has demonstrated as much through the Lexington Project. I think this is a tough sell, but that's what arguments of this sort are all about.
Bradley
Intro: Your introduction
Intro: Your introduction does a nice job of drawing in our interest to what you have to say. You have included a statement from the book that you have built upon and also given us a thesis that you will connect to the remaining of the essay.
Focus: Your focus stays on task and each paragraph does a nice job of tying itself back to the thesis.
Development: The works cited within your paragraphs give us the needed detail to sell us on the point you are driving home.
Wording: The flow of sentences and your grammar are done well.
Adequacy: Overall I feel that your essay has been done to the expectations required.
Appropriateness: It kept my attention. An uninformed reader would be able to follow.
Introduction: I like your
Introduction: I like your intro it speaks to your particular reading audience, and I think that it flows pretty well.
Thesis: I like it I think that it works, I agree on the promotes point from above.
Essay focus: You did a good job almost every paragraph keeps to the point. I’m not sure about the Ben Franklin paragraph; you could probably be fine without it.
Organization: it seems pretty organized.
Adequacy of Response to Assignment: I think you did a good job; you came back to your thesis in the conclusion and followed the argument format.
Appropriateness of topic” I think that you choose a great topic that college students can relate to and care about.
response
Introduction: I really like your introduction. I find myself nodding my head thinking "yeah, I don't have time because all of the above reasons you gave, and more"
Thesis: Very clear. I keep getting corrected and using words like I,We, You, Us - I don't know if this applies here though?? I think that maybe you should use "promotes" instead of "promote". What do you think?
I like how you introduce the Unspun book.
I really like your paragraph flow but I believe you're missing an essential element. To set up the argumentative aspect you have to have a paragraph either anti-McCain or pro-Bush's policy and then you have to slam that idea right back down. Look at Mr. Bleck's most recent blog entry for more info.
Good Luck!!!
I think you are a very good writer, I am struggling but yours flows very well and I found myself drawn in from the first paragraph