Initially this graphic failed to spark any noteworthy emotions inside of me. Some, like myself may view the picture as a commentary on racial discrimination, where the creator is trying to portray the value that despite race or creed, we are all the same. “How ordinary” I thought. It is a sound message, nevertheless we are all familiar with it. It took me roughly a year to realize that there was so much more potential in this photo that I failed to accredit it for.
The second time I witnessed this photo I began to look deeper into the image. Instead of finding a positive message about the progression of modern society, only a tune of stagnation was apparent. It is obvious to most Americans that the majority of people have a negative connotation of George W. Bush. Due to this, it should also be obvious that being compared to such a man is no form of flattery.
However, how can someone compare Obama to Bush? They are not only physically two completely different people, but presidents as well. David Frum, a former speechwriter for Bush describes Bush in an interview as being “ambitious” and “tenacious” to the point where it could easily be considered “stubbornness.” Obama, on the other hand appears to be the exact opposite. Not only is he famous for his modesty, but even for his relaxed attitude. These two can only be considered remotely similar in one aspect, and that’s in their failures.
Where Bush failed was in his over eagerness to act. His policy of “shoot first, ask questions later” has effectively worsened American and Middle Eastern relations. Although, is Obama any better? Many people would claim that he is not. The Syrian government just recently used chemical weapons which have been outlawed around the world since WWI on civilians. After catching wind of this many Americans expected Obama to confront the Syrian government for their actions and deliver prompt repercussions, but nothing was done.
It seems that even though Obama has a fresh way of handling situations, his hesitancy and indecisiveness is an easy target for criticism. Our dilapidated relationship with the Middle East and recent financial crises renders it difficult for Obama to handle any operation as if it were not a game of “operation.” Unfortunately, in politics a gentle and fragile approach is often interpreted as weakness. If this continues America’s president could effectively become an international doormat, not only to corrupt, foreign regimes, but even to the people of America as well.
The message I get from this image is that even though Bush and Obama are essentially two different paths, the destination is still the same. Unfortunately, the destination is an America that remained stagnant over the years, that despite very minute changes, is still struggling with many of the quintessential problems that were promised to be dealt with today. The reason why this graphic was chosen however, in my eyes is because it is as controversial as it is subjective. The controversial aspect of comparing the two guarantees that during the formulation of a response, one must remain convicted to their views. There is no escape or tactical withdrawal. Additionally, the subjective aspect of it ensures that there is no right answer. When formulating a response one must remain open minded, not only to the thoughts of others but to their own as well.
alwaystired247
AnonymousStudent
azntaco
beforeverge
BigBabyBaller
bitagaming
breakingbad1820
Caravan
cinderella1013
davidbdale
Yankeelover18
fatboy489zt
giantsfan224
glacierfreeze21
gobirds17
green0728
gymrat230
Gir
jerseymikes1106
jesusisking1738
jetsfan806
Kenneth Alex Krug
manipulator66
mercythyhealer14
McCormick Karner
mochaatrain
oni
powerranger
peanut2348
pinkcottoncandy4
princess01430
redbird1123
rubes1256
shxrkbait
sillyinternetperson
soulpond47240
spatel8267
stingingcrib5
tacotyphoon
thepersonindisguise
usmnt23
worldofjuice999
xephos1
Counterintuitive Fall 2022 
Requesting feedback please.
Feedback provided, —DSH
Your writing is my favorite type, Josue: the type I can admire while I gently gut it of its excesses. I don’t want to put out your fire, but I do want to help you tend it so it creates light without throwing off so much excess heat. (Wow, first it’s a fish, then it’s a campfire. I should go back and find one metaphor instead of two. A good professor would help me do that.)
P1. “Some, like myself may view the picture as a commentary on racial discrimination . . . .”
“It is a sound message, nevertheless we are all familiar with it.”
“. . . there was so much more potential in this photo that I failed to accredit it for.”
P2. “Instead of finding a positive message about the progression of modern society, only a tune of stagnation was apparent.”
Life is interrupting these notes, Josue. I will return. Dogs need to eat. Wives need coffee (with foamed milk!). Knock-knock jokes don’t write themselves.
P2 continued.
“It is obvious to most Americans that the majority of people have a negative connotation of George W. Bush. Due to this, it should also be obvious that being compared to such a man is no form of flattery.”
P3. You do a lot more “not only . . . but also” than you should, Josue. The construction is best saved for occasions when one thing is expected, the other not, but on the same terms. In the case of P3 here, to say Bush and Obama are different people but also presidents mixes the terms.
“However, how can someone compare Obama to Bush? They are not only physically two completely different people, but presidents as well.”
The terms that follow “not only” and “but also” are the two terms being connected by “also.” They should be as similar as possible.
For example:
Axl was criticized for his whiny singing voice.
Axl was also criticized for his uncontrollable petulance.
Incorrect: Axl was not only criticized for his whininess but also his petulance.
Correct: Axl was criticized not only for his whininess but also for his petulance.
Apply this to: Not only is he famous for his modesty, but even for his relaxed attitude.
“These two can only be considered remotely similar in one aspect, and that’s in their failures.”
P4. “Where Bush failed was in his over eagerness to act.”
Etc.
P5. “It seems that even though Obama has a fresh way of handling situations, his hesitancy and indecisiveness is an easy target for criticism.”
“Our dilapidated relationship with the Middle East and recent financial crises renders it difficult for Obama to handle any operation as if it were not a game of ‘operation.'”
In other words, Josue, I love the analogy and wouldn’t ever criticize your ingenuity, originality, or nerve. It’s just the “renders it difficult . . . to handle an operation . . . as if it were not” that needs an editor. Preferably you, as soon as you can.
One more and then I’ll quit. Could you take this fantastic observation, please? . . .
“Unfortunately, in politics a gentle and fragile approach is often interpreted as weakness. If this continues America’s president could effectively become an international doormat, not only to corrupt, foreign regimes, but even to the people of America as well.”
. . . and express it more like this?
I am trying to morph my inner Bush and Obama, Josue, to boldly bully you while also working for consensus. To compliment your thinking side while mentoring your writing side in this thinking/writing class. If we can agree that careful language and strict syntax serve rather than sap your creativity, we’ll be like a Democratic president with a Democratic Congress. I warn you my party won’t change, but maybe I can swing enough votes in your house to pass some new laws.
Since you never revised your post, I conclude you do not require feedback. Correct me if I’m wrong, please.
Sorry that I have never revised and requested feedback, I was focusing on the revision of the money post and the recent safe saw project. If it would not be much trouble I would like feedback.
Feedback provided. —DSH
Before I start, Josue, I should say I don’t compare versions during feedback. I respond to the new draft as new.
P1. When writers are wordy, I encourage them to edit. When second drafts are wordy, I acknowledge that my writer loves words and won’t give them up. I love words too and approve of beautiful, purposeful, sumptuous, drunk-with-prose language. But not wordiness. So, let’s keep your word count but use the right words to better purpose.
“This graphic failed” is a valuable judgment, but “view the picture as a commentary on racial discrimination” fails to judge the graphic. It’s the equivalent of saying: The picture “talks about prejudice.” Next you’ll have to tell us what it said. Wordy.
“It is a sound message, nevertheless we are all familiar with it” says: “overly familiar” or “too-familiar.”
With the words you save eliminating these tiring expressions, you can make more emphatic, beautiful, sumptuous assertions.
85 words:
85 words:
I don’t suggest these are your ideas, Josue. I do suggest that you use your considerable language currency to buy more ideas than you currently spend them on. Rich language should buy more than you’ve been getting.