REHUGO+2

__** Kathleen Parker **__ **REHUGO #1** **Précis:** Kathleen Parker, an opinion writer for //The Washington Post//, in her syndicated newspaper column //“// //Sarah Palin sits out 2012. There is a God.”// suggests that Sarah Palin’s decision to not run for president in the upcoming election is a positive thing because her candidacy would have caused mayhem. Parker compares Palin’s process of relying on God to make her decision to the hit movie //Eat, Pray, Love,// uses humor to depict how America would be distracted by her beauty and popularity to make a sound political decision, and logically explains how Palin’s candidacy would have caused havoc for the GOP. Parker’s purpose is to explain why Palin not running is a blessing in order to make an innuendo toward her. Parker speaks to the voting American public.
 * Citation: **Parker, Kathleen. "Sarah Palin sits out 2012. There is a God. - The Washington Post." //The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post//. N.p., 6 Oct. 2011. Web. 13 Oct. 2011. .
 * Category: ** Government
 * Personal Commentary: ** Parker’s comments are amusing and entertaining. Her analogies are easy to follow. I found this article to be a little offensive, not because I am a Palin fan or not, but because of some jabs at God’s existence, which confused me because she is a conservative writer.

**REHUGO #2**
 * Citation:** Parker, Kathleen. "Our unprepared graduates - The Washington Post." //The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post//. N.p., 30 Sept. 2011. Web. 13 Oct. 2011. .
 * Category:** Observation
 * Précis:** Kathleen Parker, the 2010 Pullitzer Prize winner for Commentary, in her column //“Our unprepared graduates”// claims that colleges and universities are failing to teach students basic skills. Parker lays out the potential future of America under undereducated students, references studies, authors, and statistics about the curricula students are learning versus what they should be learning, and then she connects these two points by posing the question, “How can one think critically about anything if one does not have a foundation of skills and knowledge?” Parker’s purpose is to reveal how colleges have prepared students inadequately for the competitive marketplace in order to point out that the ultimate responsibility falls on the nation’s college and university trustees. Parker calls trustees to action as well as points out to parents that they should be outraged that they have to pay such high prices for an inadequate education.
 * Personal Commentary:** For the most part, I agree with what Parker has to say, although I feel she lumps all schools as well as students together. Some colleges have outstanding programs that produce successful graduates and many students do have critical skills. The education system is out of whack and in need of major reform before a generation takes over that cannot think for itself.

** REHUGO #3 ** Précis: Kathleen Parker, one of America's most popular opinion columnists, in her column //“// //How we succeed by failing”// asserts that Steve Jobs only achieved his success by going through failure. Parker explains her paradox of how the only way to succeed is fail, references other clichés about success, and provides examples of other famous people who at first failed. Parker’s purpose is to point out that parents are too worried that kids won’t measure up that they drive them crazy with overbooked schedules and expectations in order to show them that they need to let kids experience failure. Parker’s intended audience is parents as well as their kids; she’s letting them know that the most successful people of time were once failures, so embrace it.
 * Citation: **Parker, Kathleen. "How we succeed by failing - The Washington Post." //The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post//. N.p., 14 Oct. 2011. Web. 23 Oct. 2011. [].
 * Category: ** Observation
 * Personal Commentary: ** I completely agree with Parker. I’ve seen so many of my childhood friends rebel when they were older because they were so sheltered, so stifled. When parents don’t allow their kids to think for themselves and act for themselves, they don’t get to experience failure, which is inevitable in life, so why not experience it in a “safe” environment. It always takes being broken to learn how to really soar.

** REHUGO #4 ** Personal Commentary: I loved her closing statement, “And the best part: Women no longer have to try to be like men. They can be women, which is, one humbly submits, even better.” Men are clueless. They need women. If we’re silent, they don’t listen. If we make a fuss about, they don’t listen. Solution: even the playing field. Get more estrogen out there. Women can change the world. And look good doing it;)
 * Citation:** Parker, Kathleen. "Obama’s woman problem - PostPartisan - The Washington Post." //The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post//. N.p., 23 Sept. 2011. Web. 23 Oct. 2011. [].
 * Category:** Observation
 * Précis:** Kathleen Parker, author of "Save the Males: Why Men Matter, Why Women Should Care", in her column //“Obama’s woman problem”,// claims that women in the work world, specifically, Obama’s administration are overlooked and underappreciated. Parker explains how the way she grew up led her to believe that women can easily fit in with men, but moves on to say that she is wrong, analyzes why men overlook women, and then gives solutions of how to fix it. Parker’s purpose is to show that it is not men’s fault that women are glossed over in order to prove that Obama’s administration needs //more// women. Parker is speaking to Obama and his administration, men in order to wake them up, and women in order to empower them.

**REHUGO #5**
 * Citation: **Parker, Kathleen. "President Robin Hood - The Washington Post." //The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post//. N.p., 4 Nov. 2011. Web. 6 Nov. 2011. [].
 * Category: ** Government
 * Précis: ** Kathleen Parker, former CNN co-host, in her syndicated newspaper column //President Robin Hood,// implies that Obama is stealing from the rich to give to the poor. Parker hides her opinion until the end by explaining why Republicans and Democrats are both right and wrong about their tax opinions, uses rhetorical questions to make the audience realize the nation wouldn't flourish without the wealthy, and then wraps it up by bringing in her title. Parker's purpose is to explore Republican and Democrat opinions in order to conclude that the Republicans are right; Obama is playing the class warfare card. The audience is both the left and right wings; she shows each side the flaws in their opinions.
 * Personal Commentary: ** Parker's switch of opinions and topics was hard to follow. I think it took away from her point in the end. I do appreciate that she gave credit to both sides. Her metaphor between Obama and Robin Hood worked in her favor. It created a negative image and simplified his actions.

__**Richard Cohen**__ **REHUGO #6**
 * Citation: **Cohen, Richard. "Wall Street is still playing us for suckers - The Washington Post." //The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post//. N.p., 31 Oct. 2011. Web. 6 Nov. 2011. .
 * Category: ** Government
 * Précis: ** Richard Cohen, winner of the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild Award, in his syndicated newspaper column, //"Wall Street is still playing us for suckers,"// asserts that financial firms getting off easy is a crime. Cohen uses a personal anecdote to compare the men on Wall Street to a scummy car salesman, gives shocking examples of how Citigroup got off easy in their recent civil complaint, and uses a series of rhetorical questions to emphasize that these firms should feel guilty, and people should make them pay, really pay. Cohen's purpose is to make the audience realize that instead of making filthy firms pay a mere fraction of their wealth, the executives should be put behind bars, in order to call the audience to break this culture in the nation. Cohen's audience is the people of America; he says if Obama's administration isn't going to do anything about it, the people should.
 * Personal Commentary: ** This article goes perfectly with Inside Job! I enjoyed reading it because, one I could understand it more than I previously could have, and two it showed me that this dirty work is still relevant and current. People aren't doing anything about it! Correction- people aren't doing anything effective about it. Making them pay a fraction of their wealth or settle a case "without admitting or denying" is ridiculous! Cohen is so right; what they are doing is a crime and they need to face the consequences. The investors get their money back, but Americans have lost faith in justice.

**REHUGO #7**
 * Citation: **Cohen, Richard. "Farewell, Sarah - PostPartisan - The Washington Post." //The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post//. N.p., 6 Oct. 2011. Web. 14 Oct. 2011. .
 * Category: ** Government
 * Précis: ** Richard Cohen, progressive opinion writer for //The Washington Post//, in his column //“Farewell, Sarah”// asserts that Sarah Palin is unfit to run for the presidency. Cohen gives specific examples of Palin acting dumb, repeatedly uses the word “performed” to target how Palin was nothing but her looks, and then criticizes how politicians, like herself, simply rely on media to gain support. Cohen’s purpose is to expose Palin’s inadequacy for election in order to prove that she will be completely out of the political scene in three years, and America will be on to the next “dazzling celebrity”. Cohen’s audience is Americans who fell for Palin’s naivety and charm.
 * Personal Commentary: ** Cohen’s slams against Palin were blunt and harsh, but his message contained truth. Politians aren’t politicians anymore; they are celebrities. Americans have gotten caught up in their charisma and have forgotten about what matters: the issues.

**REHUGO #8**
 * Citation: **Cohen, Richard. "The GOP debate as Animal Planet - PostPartisan - The Washington Post." //The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post//. N.p., 12 Oct. 2011. Web. 14 Oct. 2011. .
 * Category: ** Observation
 * Précis: ** Richard Cohen, a columnist for The Washington Post, in his article titled, //“The GOP debate as Animal Planet”// he implies that the Republican party is obsolete. Cohen uses an extended metaphor that compares viewing the Republican debates to watching Animal Planet, calling them simple-minded through his use of sarcasm. Cohen’s purpose is to make the conservative party seem like a joke, in order to get voters to respect and focus on the real contenders for presidency: the members of the right-wing party. Cohen is speaking to Republicans, making them realize their candidates are not the best, the Democrats, getting a kick out of his remarks, and most importantly, the voters in the middle, who are waiting to be swayed one way or the other.
 * Personal **** Commentary: ** Cohen’s sarcasm and puns are an excellent rhetorical strategy. It seems like he is making light of the issue, when really he is trying to get voters to not take the other candidates seriously.

** REHUGO #9 ** **REHUGO #10**
 * Citation: **Cohen, Richard. "Where are the anti-Semites of Occupy Wall Street? - The Washington Post." //The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post//. N.p., 24 Oct. 2011. Web. 26 Oct. 2011. [].
 * Category: ** Government
 * Précis: ** Richard Cohen, a self-proclaimed reckless Jew, in his opinion column //"// //Where are the anti-Semites of Occupy Wall Street?"// implies that the right-wing attempt to discredit both the Occupy Wall Street movement and the Democratic Party’s hesitant embrace of it is reprehensible. Cohen describes his personal experience of visiting the protest site, and uses a sarcastic tone to belittle the conservatives' accusations. His purpose is to prove that Occupy Wall Street is not an anti-Semitic function in order to support and credit its actions. Cohen's audience is those who were against Occupy Wall Street because of it anti-Semitic slant; he debunks their myth.
 * Personal Commentary: ** I think most people aren't quite clear on what Occupy Wall Street is trying to accomplish. Mostly because there are many motives. Some are against government greed, some are against globalization, and some just want their college tuition paid for. The talk of anti-Semites was probably valid. I'm sure there were some present. I think any group is just joining the riot to get publicity. For instance, there were recently Muslims who were chanting anti-American slogans. Were they recently against Wall Street? I don't think so. But they were there.
 * Citation: **Cohen, Richard. "Will Chris Christie throw a temper tantrum? - The Washington Post." //The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post//. N.p., 3 Oct. 2011. Web. 26 Oct. 2011. [].
 * Category: ** Government
 * Précis: ** Richard Cohen, opinion columnist for //The Washington Post//, in his article //“Will Chris Christie throw a temper tantrum”// implies that Chris Christie, a presidential candidate from New Jersey is the opposite of what the Washington needs. Cohen uses epanalepsis to emphasize what is wrong with Christie, provides famous sources that are concerned about Christie’s qualities, and uses analogies that belittle his importance and worthiness as President. Cohen’s purpose is to point out all of Christie’s faults, even those that don’t matter, in order to convince his audience that he is not a deserving candidate. Cohen is speaking to voters whom support Christie.
 * Personal Commentary: ** By making fun of other people’s objections against Christie, he derided his own opinions. The silly faults of Cohen, such as being fat, were still effective because it made the reader not take the candidate seriously.