Education and War

This political cartoon struck me on a personal note as I recently came to the realization that in a year and a half I will be graduating with a degree in political science... then what? I plan on going to law school eventually; however, most corporate law firms do not hire recent law school graduates without some sort of work experience. Therefore, I shall enter the world of employment next spring with a degree that has taught me little more than how to read in the most critical of fashions, formulate arguments, view other cultures and societies with an open mind and write with concision. Other than in the world of law, where are the aforementioned skills applicable?

The political cartoon above was intended to make people laugh, for that is one of the sole purposes of political cartoons; however, political cartoons are also intended to make people reflect on the subject matter of cartoon. This particular political cartoon achieved the latter at the expense of the former, for although the cartoon does not exactly disseminate an established truth, it does speak to the dire situation of US foreign relations with the Middle East - not exactly a subject of laughter.

While thinking about what the next couple of decades potentially hold for the United States - and the rest of the world - with regard to relations with the Middle East, I came to the conclusion that the political cartoon is in a sense paradoxical. Though soldiers will always be needed to fight wars in the physical sense, if education is geared more to the problem that hinders our world the most (conflict), there may come a day where soldiers will not be needed to fulfill their traditional role of fighting. Rather than instructing students to study what makes them feel good, students ought to be instructed to study what will ultimately benefit society and the state. This would only make sense, after all, as billions of dollars in government funds go toward funding higher education in America.

Ultimately, the college graduate and the soldier above both ought to be channeling their efforts and their training toward the goal of making the world safe for democracy. Fighting alone will not win the wars of the future; winning the wars of the future will require a collaborative effort between government, businesses and education, an effort coined "corporatism" by many political scientists and historians.

Do America a Favor: Do Not Vote for John Edwards

How can a man like John Edwards be a good president when he pays $400 for a haircut? Anybody that spends their own money so frivolously cannot be trusted to spend the money of American citizens. If John Edwards becomes president, $55,619.04 in taxes will be used over the course of his presumably 8 years in the White House for his $400 haircuts. That is, of course, assuming that the North Carolina senator follows the meterosexual-sanctioned hair care regiment of a hair cut and styling ever 3 weeks over the course of his 8 years in office.

Moreover, while John Edwards has good intentions with his stance on healthcare reform, his proposed avenue of bringing the American people healthcare reform is ludicrous. In a recent speech, Edwards asserted that if he were elected president, he would deprive all members of Congress healthcare until they pass his universal healthcare plan. How could this communist simply leave 540 civil servants without healthcare? The American people must not endorse this sort of rhetoric from such a fear-mongering GQ-wannabe.

John Edwards’ influence on the War on Terror may be the one reason the American people ought to elect John Edwards to be their next president. Before George W. Bush took office in 2000, U.S. relations with Islamic extremists were tranquil. However, with the election of an Antidisestablishmentarianist such as George Bush, Islamic extremists perceived the citizens of the world’s most powerful country to be legitimizing Western Christian values… no wonder why Islamic extremists slaughtered 3,000 people on September 11, 2001.

However, over the past two presidential elections, college students have turned out to vote in record numbers and the influence of college voters is anticipated to increase in 2008. Conveniently enough for John Edwards, recent polls show that the college vote is swinging in his favor as college students are not buying the “I will make a good president simply because I am a woman/I am black” rhetoric being put forth by Hillary and Barack. With atheism on college campuses becoming as fashionable as avoiding eye contact or refusing to acknowledge one’s presence as they pass you on State Street, college students casting votes for John Edwards will reverse the harm done to U.S.-Middle Eastern relations over the past 7 years as receiving the college vote will lead Edwards to be perceived as anti-Christian by Islamic-extremists; certainly a step in the right direction to nullifying the tension between the Christian West and the Islamic Middle East.

Though Edwards’ influence on U.S. foreign relations with the Middle East may appear as significant justification for voting for him, he still comes up short on the domestic front. In a recent speech by Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Shilling, Shilling points out that, “Edwards, and all liberals for that matter, lack the ability to evoke nationalist undertones in the American people," something that Shilling claims, is "necessary during trying times.” Shilling stated, "the American people ought to vote for Fred Thompson because 2 out of 3 country singers intend on voting for Thompson.” Shilling commented that, “Country singers – a sect of artists also known as ‘God’s Chorus’ and ‘Uncle Sam’s Entourage’ – have a knack for inculcating patriotism within Americans.”

As you can now see, a vote for John Edwards is a vote for the demise of America. Make the right decision in 2008 and reject John Edwards' bid for the American presidency.