American Consumption a "Sacrifice?"

Schiff, Peter. "CNBC Redefines the Word "Sacrifice"." safehaven.com. N.p., 11 Feb. 2005. Web. 27 Oct. 2011.

This article is criticizing a person who told CNBC that American consumption is a "sacrifice" and Americans are "bearing the brunt of world consumption," and have the "obligation to consume." He goes on to say that it is not Americans who are bearing a burdon but the foreign countries who produce our goods for us. This article is trying to inform people that it is truly the people who produce goods that are making a sacrifice, not the people consuming them. He says that "foreigners are getting the short end of the economic stick," and "It is as if Americans regard the rest of the world as slaves in their global plantation." The author does not mention anything about buying American products, but he seems to be against foreign countries producing all of our goods. The article was short, interesting, and informative, though some parts were hard to understand. This may be a good article for me to use because it is against foreign countries producing goods for America. However the article mostly talks about how consuming is not a sacrifice but producing is.  

Americans Shouldn't Buy Foreign Products

Man, Sprinkler. "Americans Stop Buying Foreign Products." sprinklerman.hubpages.com. N.p., 2011. Web. 25 Oct. 2011.

This article was mostly the authors opinion on buying cars made in China. He says that Americans should buy vehicles that were made in the U.S., saying that buying foreign cars only hurts our economy. The author is trying to convince people to buy cars from America and the audience may be people who agree with his argument. This article is totally biased towards buying cars in America and never says any possible benefits of buying cars from China. The author does not make a very effective argument because he does not use elevated language or give support for his argument. This article is very short and is not very informative; it is just someone's opinion. I don't think I'll use this article for my paper becuase a quote from this article would not be very "official," I would just be citing some guy's opinion.

Politician that favors american-made products

Killough, Ashley. "Roemner Slams China in front of Chinese Embassy." politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com. N.p., 1 Sept. 2011. Web. 13 Oct. 2011.

This article is about the politician Buddy Roemner's opinion about foreign-made products. It says that Roemner is against products made in China. This article is informing people about Roemner's stand on the issue of china-made products. The audience is most likely people who are interested in politics and want to see more american products and american jobs as a result of those products. This article isn't biased but simply states Roemner's opinion. The article mostly concerns politics and it was not very interesting to read. I do agree with some of the things this article has to say and I might use quotes from it for my paper.  

Article that favors foreign products

Carreira, Robert. "Buying Foreign Goods Saves American Jobs." thefreemanonline.org. N.p., June 2004. Web. 13 Oct. 2011.

This article is convincing people that buying foreign products boosts the american economy rather than hurting it. It states that foreign products are cheaper, and therefore, the money that people save buying foreign products can be used to support local american businesses such as theatres and restaurants. This author is trying to inform people as to why buying foreign-made products can save jobs in America. The audience may be people who are interested in the topic and are curious as to how foreign products can be a benefit to America. This article is biased in that it favors foreign products and disagrees with people who advocate for american-made products. The article is very informative and interesting to read, and the author makes his argument without insulting the opposition. I don't really agree with some of the things this article says and I believe I can make a strong enough argument against it.

Reflection on Six Blogs

I'm not going to write my paper on electric cars or wind energy. I am not very passionate about those topics and may not be controversial enough. It may be hard to find unbiased information about euthanasia or same-sex marriage. Also, the opposing side for these topics have some strong points. The arguments for my side may not be strong enough to persuade readers of my essay against the opposing side. It will probably be hard to find a lot of information about fast food. I've decided that my topic will be America's use of foreign products. It's easy to find information both for and against this topic, and I think I can make my argument strong enough to persuade people to take my side.

Arguments Behind Electric Cars

Bell, Claes. "Pros and Cons of Electric Cars." bankrate.com. N.p., 18 Jan. 2011. Web. 5 Oct. 2011.

Electric cars run on cheap fuel, require less maintanance, and are clean for the environment. However, they are more expensive to buy, and there are hardly any mechanics who can fix electric cars. The author is informing people about electric cars, and his audience is people who are interested in electric cars and want to know their advantages and disadvantages. This article is not biased as it lists both the pros and the cons. A fallacy is that there is termonology in this article that only people interested in cars would understand. This article is very short and to the point, but it doesn't give a lot of information. I don't think this is a good topic for me because I'm not that interested in this argument. This may be a good topic for people who are interested in electric cars and either strongly support them or don't support them.

Wind Energy

"Pros and Cons of Wind Power." windturbine.me. N.p., 2008. Web. 4 Oct. 2011.

Electricity produced by wind turbines is a "green" alternative to fossil fuels. Wind energy is a renewable resource that does not put pollutants in the air. However, wind turbines can effect migrating birds and television reception. The author's purpose is to educate people on what wind energy is and why it is beneficial. The intended audience may be people who are interested in having their own wind turbine or want to know more about wind energy. This article was very biased towards wind turbines. Even though the article listed some disadvantages, the author wrote that,"The advantages of wind power are obvious and they far outweigh any of the disdvantages." This article was very informative about wind energy and the benefits of using renewable resources rather than fossil fuels. This may not be a good topic for me or others because I don't think it's controversial enough. There is not a lot of information against wind energy. I favor wind energy, but it would be hard to find information opposing wind energy.