Research

My first primary source only have a few things that make it primary. It has a couple of statistical data graphs that chart growth of transnational corporations. I had trouble finding concrete statistical studies with lexis nexis statistical. It was difficult because, this one was not already explained to us in class, and once I found a study that appealed to me, I couldn't even find the full text because the links on the abstract would never lead me to it, and when I looked up the titles on the general search, I never found the particular study that I wanted. So my first source has a lot of secondary input on foreign direct investment of transnational corporations. My second document is a primary source of a transcript of a capitol hill hearing testimony dealing with the inability of the Federal Regulation and Oversight of Energy's inability to discern the regulatory failures of the company Enron. This was found relatively quickly on the Lexis Nexis congressional studies

Corporations

Even though this is a prominent theme within debates, it can still be narrowed down to specific issues. It can be narrowed down to issues on how much power they have, how to tax them, and changing their role in the world. I want to base my paper more specifically on decreasing their power, and this can be further narrowed down to issues such as changing their status in the nation as being an "individual". Also it can be debated on whether or not corporation should be allowed intellectual property rights on living organisms. I think I want to stick to the topic of decreasing their power and uses the other narrowed down issues as points of why their power should be decreased.

A lot of people have experience with this issue, because many people are tied to corporation whether it be scientists manual laborer's politicians, and etc. Their role in society affects all social classes. Although most of these strata of society deal more with being impacted by corporations, I would Say that people who have the most experience in it are employees of the main office of the corporation.

everyone in the world is talking about this issue because of the rapid pace of globalization that has hit our society. Foreign relations have a lot to do with corporations considering that a lot of the factories are based in countries with a lower cost of labor.

Primary sources that I would like to tap into are statistical studies of corporations actions. Another primary source would be finding an employee from a corporations and interviewing him or her. What I really want to find is the positive and negative affects corporations have, and for example how growing advances in science have allowed corporations have some amazingly close to owning life as we know it.

Humurous Piece

My piece is a new-talk show skit of a business meeting with John McCain and the current Chinese president Hu Jintao. I wanted to exaggerate John McCain's stand with corporations. I highlighted the Republican stereotype of sometimes forgeting the needs and wants of the lower class or foreign entity's to implement free market and capitalist policies. I also used a few tendencies that John McCain seemed to emphasize in his debate against Obama as well as some influence from the Saturday Night Live Debate.

I feel like my piece lags at some point, and the joke or exaggeration does not get across. What could I do to spice it up a bit? Does it catch your attention from the beginning?

Humurous Argument

It may be a relative easy skit to choose, but I choose the SNL skit of the presidential debate in Mississippi to be my example of a humorous argument. The way that each actor accentuated the candidates diction and common ideas was hilarious. They pointed at each candidates overwhelming disadvantages using hyperbole. For example, how McCain kept justifying how he was different from Bush by explaining his predictable voting patterns against some of republican's, especially Bush's, policy, they characterized what he was saying by the actor of John McCain proclaiming that he is an unreliable candidate. The joke of Obama pulling the race card in dealing with North Korea, represented the lack in confidence of Obama being experienced enough to be effective in international diplomacy. This skit is also a very good example of the kind of things I want to implement in my humor piece. I want to create a dialogue between John McCain and Asian leaders as well as Obama's dialogue with them, emphasizing on redundant points the candidates brought up in their debate, and other things I found amusing.
http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/presidential-debate/704121/

Op-Ed

I want to be creative on this project and write the piece from an Asian point of view. Many different nationalities live in America and their voice has a right to be heard too. What I specifically want to do with the topic from the Article "The Next President should focus more on Asia is to focus on the benefits of focusing more on Asia, and not just the countering reasons like we are doing nothing in Iraq. I think it will be hard trying to voice it through the perspective of a different nationality, but I want to try. Plus, the study the author of my artist used for research had a variety of nationalities within the study itself that will help me achieve my goal.

Letter to the Editor

Re: Next President should focus more on Asia.
I think that an account of how the United States should focus more on Asia, from a foundation mixed with Asian and American logistics and views, is an interesting way to analyze the situation. Normally, this type of account would allow the reader to see both perspectives of the nations in question. Although Paul suggests that it is a foundation of both ethnicities by quoting the retired US diplomat and the South Korean Minister, who developed parts of the study, I think that Paul fails to address the views of the Asians in the article. The article highlights how the U.S has been neglecting Asian diplomacy, not how (according to Han Sung-Joo, Tommy Koh, C. Raja Mohan of the study) Asia “wants the U.S to be an effective, global leader” when dealing with, as stated in Peter’s article, “pressing international problems.”
However, Peter does include quotes from the South Korean Foreign Minister on the topic of how the next president “will inherit the North Korean nuclear problem and should not lose time in diplomacy aimed at talking Pyongyang into giving up its atomic weapons.” Peter includes this claim to show how the American government might lose sight of important economical relations with Asia, and how Asia does not want this to occur. Though this point is an interesting outlook of why the U.S would be more active in Asia, it does not explain why it should.
The U.S focus “on the urgent at the expense of the important,” explains how the U.S. has lost some of its standings in Asian politics, but not why the U.S should focus more on Asia. In the Introduction to the study titled “Americas Role in Asia,” it explains how the U.S. is losing its dominant role in Asian trade due to the rising regional identity of Asia that constitutes the majority of Intra-Asian trade. I may have assumed that the U.S. might want to be more focused on Asia due to economic reasons, but I would have not known that the U.S’s importance to maintain this relationship was so dire because of the declining majority it has within Asian trade interactions.
Peter’s extensive knowledge of the study puts him at a credible position with his audience to consider his point; however I think he missed out on a few details that would allow reader to fully understand why the next president should focus more on Asia.
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1034895420080911

Factual Argument

The title of my factual argument article is McCain Seen as Less Likely to Bring Change. Although the poll's title referring to the people's positon on change, it also bring's a number of other issues, like people's position on the Republican candidates after the convention, and different groups of people decisions on who the advocated. What I though was important in this article is that the authors Robin Toner and Adam Nagourney included a detailed description of what poll they found their factual data from. For example, how much the sampling error was, how many people were included in the nationwide telephone poll, and how many were registered voters. Another point that they brought up was a correlation between the economy being the top issue affecting their voting position, which presidential candidate will be able to manage the economy better, and who they think was less likely to bring change. Since the majority thought Obama had the greater ability to manga the economy McCain was ultimatly the candidate who was seen less likely to bring change.