The student news site of Wayland High School

Wayland Student Press

The student news site of Wayland High School

Wayland Student Press

The student news site of Wayland High School

Wayland Student Press

Revolution Prep

Ready to unlock your potential? Whether tutoring or test prep, we’ve got you covered. Check out our low-stress, high-impact approach to academic support—just as individualized as you are.

Follow us on Instagram
Advertisement
News Brief: Schedule changes this week
News Brief: Schedule changes this week
March 26, 2024
Stay Informed with WSPN With Our Newsletter

Comment: Where is the True Debate?

People! We all have our first amendment rights. Instead of attacking each other with sarcastic comments, this forum is for sharing perspectives. The true purpose of this forum is for people to learn about the subject. The responses should be handled in a debate fashion, with succinct facts and clear points of view. As I read these comments, I found that there was very little factual information and few truly constructive suggestions. What were the candidates’ positions on the issues?



For example: Ben, if you are going to comment and claim that Mitt Romney can’t possibly relate to the common man, put some actual facts that support your point of view. Intelligently inform readers why you have that opinion. Elizabeth, if you are worried about celebrity endorsements, mention why that is troublesome to you. If you are claiming Hillary is egotistical, put in facts to support this. Debates and true arguments are meant to be clear and be supported by facts.

Now, lets talk about celebrity endorsements; all candidates want them. Why? The reason is simple: the “common people” we have been referring to are drawn to celebrities. Therefore, when candidates want to reach many people with their message, they welcome those celebrity endorsements. In fact, both Democrats and Republicans use these celebrity endorsements. For example, Barack Obama wanted to draw tons of people for his event, so he invited Oprah Winfrey. As a result, more people came to hear him speak. Even Huckabee has his Chuck Norris.

And now, I have comments on Mitt Romney. No one has cited the very important fact that Mr. Romney is the only governor in the history of United States to have successfully worked out a universal health care plan for his state. He continued to lobby and work with both Republicans and Democrats in this state after leaving the governorship to get this legislation and plan approved. This is a plan that is helping the “common people” and it takes a leader with executive and operational skills to get the job done. Furthermore, he is a successful businessman. With the current state of the economy, his business skills could be beneficial.

I am not a Republican or Democrat. I’ve been examining both parties and making assessments based on candidates’ positions, credibility, experience, and facts!

And finally and also ironically, If Elizabeth really wants to go to a source who knows politics and the ins and outs of all the candidates, Republican or Democrat, a great resource would be Ben. He lives, eats, breathes, and sleeps politics. He could give you facts on ALL of the candidates and then some. There is no doubt he would be a great resource. Just be prepared to listen objectively, if you dare to go there!

Challenge to you both!

View Comments (4)
Donate to Wayland Student Press
$60
$1500
Contributed
Our Goal

Your donation will support the student journalists of Wayland High School. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment, cover our annual website hosting costs and sponsor admission and traveling costs for the annual JEA journalism convention.

More to Discover
Donate to Wayland Student Press
$60
$1500
Contributed
Our Goal

Comments (4)

All Wayland Student Press Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • J

    JeannaltMar 20, 2008 at 1:24 AM

    thats it, man

    Reply
  • A

    Anonymous Author of "Where's the True Debate"Feb 11, 2008 at 1:28 PM

    Hi Andrew B.,

    The points you make are exactly the reasons why I bothered to comment at all. I know several of the people that commented and I was disappointed. Putting your name on negative comments, which some did, can come back to haunt you later. I can even identify some of the “anonymous” based on some of the language and content, or their aliases. I don’t know if all the parties involved have even read my comments or even care. Some people are really into this subject and have a great opportunity to inform, but also learn.

    I hadn’t thought about the irrational side of the political scene. The strong-minded people you mention in this area that are not likely to accept, listen to, or even examine others viewpoints scare me!

    The route or role that the online experience has is fascinating, but also is sad. Some, who desperately want to be heard, think rude and negative is the way. I also believe that effective communication skills and language are being lost in this process.

    It is also a little eerie that I haven’t had many replies at all, but maybe that’s because I did reach some people. A bit of proof perhaps?
    Your response is great!!! Filled with facts and valid interesting viewpoints. This leads me to also think that the initial problem was the quality of Liz’s piece. If its content was more substantial and factual, it would have been less likely to be punched to death. The online sharks were just waiting for their chance. Then, it was mostly downhill from there.

    Although I appreciate your offer to meet and agree it would be fun, I don’t think I will ever reveal myself. You would just die if you knew who I was. It would provide a really, really, really good laugh. 🙂

    Oh yah, almost forgot! I also see some irony in relation to the current political scene and the online experience we’ve been looking at. Some in politics are concerned about the increased influence of the right. (Christian right, moral right, conservatives, or whatever lables they are assigned.) So, the way to fight that for some is by being so far to the left that you not only are liberal, opinionated, and strong-minded; but rude, anonymous, profane, vulgar and plain out of control. You become verbally abusive and their worst nightmares come to life. This is the way to get your real message across! That’s for sure the way to relax the political opponents fears on the right! This situation is funny to me. It will probably bring on the attacks. Before they come people, I fully realize those on the right have been online attackers as well and vulgar.
    I’m just saying looking at this one little piece of left vs. right is totally comical.

    And yet, I will remain fatally idealistic. Thanks for taking the time to hear my message and comment Andrew.

    Reply
  • A

    Andrew B.Feb 5, 2008 at 4:11 PM

    As high as your ideals are, I believe they unfortunately remain just that: ideals. I wish that what you say could be possible, but because we are on an online forum posting about a highly inflammatory topic, and because our posts can be completely confidential the posters are not going to be rational, they are not going to use facts to support their ideas, and they are not necessarily going to be polite.

    As Yair Amichai-Hamburger says in “The Social Net: Understanding Human Behavior in Cyberspace”, early studies in the Internet era actually showed that social involvement decreases online. People become less involved in what they are saying, because, quite simply, they can afford to be more detached. There is less responsibility for online actions, especially if they are completely anonymous. The worst danger is that the administrator of the site will erase your comment, and then you can simply post it again.

    Even offline, American culture tends to be impolite. 85% of Americans say that their fellow countrymen are “not as polite as they should be” according to an article on http://www.bnet.com (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4021/is_6_25/ai_105777517). Additionally, they cite young adults (this website’s target audience, unless I am mistaken) as significantly more rude than adults – 74% say that they swear in public, something that we can all testify to. If high school students are impolite offline, there is no reason for this to extend to the Internet, where they cannot even get demerits for insolence.

    As for rationality, politics and political thinking has a long history of being irrational. Beginning with the slander of Andrew Jackson and the Peggy Eaton affair, our political leaders have been assaulted with many things that are not necessarily fact. Strong-minded people are not likely to accept arguments that are against their way of thinking: this is just a fact. And when, online, a person is presented with a comprehensive list of reasons why their idea is wrong, they are still being told that they are wrong and they are going to react to that negatively (this is enhanced because any negative responses cannot be attributed to them and they cannot possibly be punished).

    As for our first amendment rights, I don’t think they apply here. Because the website is private property (not government property) the administrators can in fact limit what we say.

    The school, debate hall, and courthouse are places for scholarly debate with fact presentation, scholarly rebuttals, and conclusions. To ask the masses of users that come to this site and post anonymously to engage in these acts, however, is probably too much to ask for.

    Having said all that, I would love to be proven wrong. I believe that it is within the capability of humanity to be courteous online, but my experience has shown that it’s not possible. Because you are anonymous, I can’t address you by name, but if you would like to continue this conversation face-to-face, I’m sure we would both enjoy it.

    Reply
  • Y

    Your cable providerFeb 4, 2008 at 6:20 AM

    Fin.

    Reply
Activate Search
Comment: Where is the True Debate?