Elizabeth Warren's DNA Results

This article was written by Tammy Bruce. It appeared on Fox online but, was originally from Washington Post. The argument was that Senator Elizabeth Warren had a false DNA test result.  To attract the intended audience which is, far right conservatives, they made sure to point out that she was a democrat and had words against the democratic party. This could make a fraction of people a little doubtful about this article because it has the potential to come across as more of a rant. The basic argument is that Senator Warren DNA results are false. The writer is assuming that the Democrats are just craving attention. They imply that they want court orders for her to say that this whole ordeal is a lie. The important terms such as the DNA test are not well defined. They do not tell us what type of DNA test she took.  The type of evidence that this article uses is not clear enough for it to be good evidence. The reason is because they are vague about where their information came from. The article was not quite successful at convincing me. The reason why is because they sometimes go off topic and their evidence is too vague. It does not change my mind that Senator Warren’s results were not a hoax. The political significance shows how two parties can be so defensive in what they think is “right”. It does not make much of a difference to my understanding of the political world because it is known that any opposing party will try to take down the other. This affects the political process because one person will here one side off the story whether it’s democratic or republican. They will hear one side and probably not take into account what the opposing side says. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Reason Why I'm Unsatisfied With The Government

The federal government is not doing a good job with gun control.  The reason is that America is having a more frequent mass shooting. This is a bad thing because it puts millions of lives in danger. Despite having many Americans for gun control (between 50-60%) the US somehow still has weak gun laws. This is a bad thing because the American peoples’ voice is not being heard. To get a gun the only thing that could potentially prevent an unfit person to get a gun is if they were charged a felony. Most people who harm themselves with guns got them legally. These are the people who are likely to have mental health issues. Even though the federal law states no one who was involuntarily admitted to the psychiatric hospital can own a gun, there are ways to hide or avoid it. This results in loopholes that can be exploited. For example, someone can be diagnosed with a serious mental illness but not take any steps to get better. When they are at their lowest point, they can hide it, buy a gun a
Read more

What The Government Should Do About Birth Right Citizenship

We need to keep birthright citizenship. It is a constitutional right to make sure that children who were born with foreign parents stand a chance to become citizens. If we repeal the 14th amendment, we would have more “illegal aliens”. The reason is that a lot of natural born parents don’t really know how to obtain citizenship for their child if they are not natural born. The schools fail to teach children how people who are not natural born obtain citizenship. Most of the “illegal immigrants” are legally trying to get asylum. If we get rid of birthright citizenship it could hurt the child and the family in the long run. The chances of that newborn child getting citizenship would be lower because the parents are probably not literate in English enough. Even if the parents are not citizens the newborn did not choose their fate, so it would not be fair in the long run for the kid. The thing that can really hurt children with American parents is that if they were born outside of US terri
Read more

My Commentary of My College's Work

In  Libertarian Lad y, the author Tonni Hammler is making the argument. It appeared in a section of a blog. The argument was that the wall that Donald Trump is trying to build is imprudent and a waste of money. To get the audience's attention she uses a lot of exclamation marks and gives the reader some mind-blowing facts. This could affect the content because it makes it very powerful. The basic argument is that America should not build a wall between the US and Mexico. The assumption that she relies on is that the wall is too expensive. It states that instead of using that money on the wall we could spend it on more important things such as helping the homeless. The important terms are clearly defined in this piece. Even though she clearly expresses her emotions, her claims have been backed by a good amount of evidence. The argument was successful and it did convince me. Now I think that it's a bad idea because it's a waste of money and because "illegal" immigra
Read more