Dead Certain Summary

This is also clearly not true, as it has been proven that McCarthy accused others to gain political power. For example, McCarthy’s downfall was caused when he clashed with the army. Roberts claims that “McCarthy and his chief counsel, Roy M. Cohn, were accused of improperly using their influence to get preferential assignments for… David Schine, who had been drafted into the military.” (3). To sum this up, those who supported McCarthy had few rebuttals in regards to the turmoil he created in America. Therefore, McCarthyism stirred the pot and intensified the strife between

Bush and his administration in reference to the United States of America post-9/11 policies. to place it more accurately, he argues that the Bush administration skillfully used the shock that affected the country once the fear attacks, so as to attain its own goals, as well as the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The author stands on the bottom that the United States of America authorities used mass media as means that of pressure on the mass audience. Moreover, media served as suggests that of psychological pressure on Americans since they accelerated the worry that flooded minds and souls of American individuals. At a similar time, the author implies that American’ reasoning skills were much unfit due to the overwhelming power of mass media that bombarded the consciousness of American citizens with terrible news and even additional terrible forecasts regarding the longer term of the USA (Gore, 2007).

The beginning of the speech went fairly well as he was honoring Washington, however, he ended up ridiculing Congress. President Johnson usually spoke harshly about Congress and his mouth had the tendency to get him in trouble. In his speech, Johnson said, “I find men I care not by what name you call them…who still stand opposed to the restoration of the Union of these States.” He later would call out Thaddeus Stevens, Charles Sumner, and Wendell Phillips for plotting his assassination. In his speech, Johnson said, “I say that I have no doubt the intention was to incite assassination, and so get out of the way the obstacle from place and power.” Thaddeus Stevens and the radical Republicans viewed Johnson’s speech as a declaration of war. Andrew Johnson was a man who was not afraid to speak out against Congress.

Also, Saddam used another Machiavelli method that he mentioned in his piece, and he chose fear over love. I remember that everyone feared Saddam because he was ruthless against whoever threatens his authority. Saddam created this fear when he started his presidency because I think that he thought that a leader would not survive in his position without fear. For example, before he became president, he was the Vice President of Iraq. The president at that time who was Ahmed Hassan Al-bakr was forced to resign by Saddam because Saddam wanted to take his place.

Andrew Jackson was said to be one of the democratic president to have good and bad choices during his term. Andrew Jackson made history for being the first democratic president. People thought that his choices were very bad for the country. Others thought that Andrew Jackson’s choices help to make the country greater and more better. Andrew Jackson was chosen for president for the smart decisions he made during the war.

Now, back to our 'writer Doyla ' and his claim [make American hate again] when Reagan came on the scene to run against a then failed president, [Carter] the left wing media, [the only media at that time] along with the Democrat party, filled the air and the air-waves with all kinds of hate. At that time they claimed there were more moderate Republicans to vote for. e.g. Anderson, Baker, Dole, Bush. Deja Vu As our 'writer ' says,” Candidates who tried to offer a sunnier vision, Carson, Kasich and “Bush.” The 'sunnier ones ' just sat back and let the left wing rant and rave.

Under the guise of calling for patriotism and support of the troops, presidents have managed to put top down pressure on the population with some success. Usually in these extreme situations the president can get Congress to pretty much fall in line and approve almost anything that looks reasonable. They can also do a lot in secret using "National Security" as a cover. This tactic also worked quite successfully for GWB after 9/11. In WWII and the Civil War eventually the "good guys" won and things pretty much went back to normal, though there was fallout.

Based on how he portrayed the former president, the author believes that George Bush was missing the point about the War on Terror. Many people believed that President Bush 's War on Terror did nothing but harm the lives of millions of Iraqi, Afghanistanian, and Pakistani civilians and cost America billions of dollars. It is probable that the author thought that Bush 's actions over the course of the war were unnecessary and that he missed the most important part of it : taking down the man responsible for 9/11. Osama Bin Laden in drawn in the picture behind a deep in thought President Bush holding a sword and having an irritated expression, I think meaning behind this is : while President Bush was missing out on his true purpose for starting the War on Terror, Osama Bin Laden was already one step ahead of him and preparing to attack America once

Saddam Hussein has been regarded for centuries as a lethal dictator that led Iraq into the despair and poverty we see today. However, despite his dictatorial methods of leading his country, Hussein accomplished some astonishing heights for his beloved country; heights that were destroyed by the American invasion in 2001. Now, it seems that the question on everyone’s lips is; “Was Iraq better before or after the American invasion?” Many would argue ‘after’ indefinitely, however, many Iraqi citizens are more inclined to believe that their country was better off under the rule of Saddam Hussein. Despite his predominately Ba’thist ideology and nationalist approach to leadership, Hussein never exploited his own people. Unlike America, who invaded Iraq for their own economic and political gain after the attacks of September 11.

I have come to realize that the media has always sided what was popular to the public. Though in some cases I’m sure there have been some influencing through monetary means and under the table deals. Nonetheless the media actually served as a counter argument to my thoughts and actually helped me remembered in why I vote for what I vote for. As you can see from most of the media in the last 6 years it has served towards democrats and more government interference. Now don’t get me wrong things like the patriot act are necessary for the safety of our nations but I believe the NSA has been taking things much too far.