U.S.A Today & Washington Post Online Edition Discussion

On Tuesday, both USA Today and Wahington Post had a head story on the stock market and how it is still plummeting. On Wednesday, USA Today and Wahington Post yet had another head story on the economy about the Feds cutting some rate of something to 1%.On Thursday, USA Today and The Washington Post News both had a story about how the economy shrinks at 0.3% Pace in third quarter( whatever that means). Basically, throughout the course of three days both news sources had similar stories of significance. I can tell what USA Today considers the most important news because the important story has its title in bold lettering--bolder than the other stories. Also, the most significant story is usually in the "Top News" section. I can tell what stories the Washington Post considers most important by the stories being in the "First Story" section. I think that the Washington Post reports its news in a more dramatic way than USA Today. For an example, on Wednesday, both newspapers had a story on Barack Obama and his 30-minute infomercial. USA Today's headline for it was, " Obama set for primetime infomercial.," a headline that sets a serious, non dramatic tone. On the other hand, the Washington Post's headline for Obama's infomercial was, " Obama takes to the air." In my opinion, the Washington Post's title sound pretty dramatic. That title reminds me of an announcer of some sort announcing an astronaut about to take off in a rocket. Also, what adds to the dramatic title are the contents in the story that follows it. Somewhere in the story, the Washington Post says, " Obama aims to be everywhere a TV signal can reach..." I think that statement sounds like a semi-critical, dramatic opinion. Although both USA Today and the Washington Post are reliable sources of news, I think that USA Today represent the stories that the reporters cover in a (as said before)more serious, not dramatic style.

One Best Movie

Before I start this, I must say that I have so many movies that I like to watch—so many favorites. One of the best movies I have seen was High School Musical. All of the dancing and cheesy music just gets me in a good mood. On top of that, did I mention the eye candy? Whoa! That Corbin Bleu—Curly hair guy—is something else. He is just absolutely hot. The plot of the movie had something to do with the most popular girl in school—Sharpay—not wanting a "brain"--Gabriella-- to take over “her spotlight” in—you’ve guessed it—a musical!!! The elements of High School Musical that makes it enjoyable are as I mentioned the dancing and "gummy" music. I am glad the music does not send a negative message. It is loaded with fun, great singing, dancing and great eye candy. The dance moves in the movie makes me want to get up and dance. The moves are great.The movie is like two hours long.I like HSM because at the end, everyone gets together, settles their differences and SINGS! I like musicals! Believe me, this movie is definitely not boring. In my opinion, the acting is pretty good for the type of genre--not phony or too over the top. I give my props to the main actors--Zac Efron, Vanessa Hudgens, Ashley Tisdale, Lucas Grabeel, CORBIN BLEU, and Monique Coleman. When I am feeling down, I would definintely watch HSM. I rate HSM a 9 out of 10. High School Musical is a hit, indeed. If someone is not into musicals, then they probably would not enjoy HSM that much.

I'm Talkin' Talk Show

On Tuesday September 30th, I tuned in to the Bill LuMaye Show around 3:05pm up until 4:40pm. Bill LuMaye had a guest named Dr. Campbell Harvey, who is an Economics professor at Duke University. LuMaye and Dr. Campbell were discussing the economy, specifically the Bailout Plan. Bill says that it is hard to understand what is going on. They were explaining how the Bailout Plan is a plan in which the government spends up to $700 billion to buy distressed mortgages. It involves buying up nearly all outstanding debt from some of the biggest investment firms in the world. Part of the plan is to buy up bad loans so that investment banks could start lending again. The Bailout Plan is aimed at preventing Wall Street from collapsing. Dr. Campbell and Bill discussed that the plan would result in taxpayers paying much more on assets or something. He says that the plan is misleading and that it will affect mainstream—families and businesses. Economic hardship is in progress. They announced that there may be a revised Bailout Plan that will be voted on sometime soon. Honestly, I kind of dozed on and off during some of this talk because of the “monotone-ness.” Not only that, but I was tired. I attempted to stay awake. I noticed that there was not any music and very little commercials. That is not a problem. This is the information I have gotten from the talk. If you ask me, I'd say that I have received a sufficient amount on the account that my eyes and brain was semi-alert, semi-not alert. Wouldn't it make more sense to just take that $700b and pay off the mortgages of people in trouble? The mortgage companies would still get their money and people's homes would be saved. Would the rich be affected by this rejected plan in any way? (I do not quite comprehend events like this.) Regardless of whatever plan of action the government decides to take, nine times out of ten, there are ALWAYS pros and cons. For any move that is made, there are ALWAYS going to be resulting consequences for everyone. I hope that the government does not take the dead wrong path and screw everyone up. I really hope that the economy can boost its way up to the top of the peak. In the future, I think that there will be satellite robots in which people can own and listen to talk radio. Or, there will be wall talk radio touch pads in which people can press a button to listen to talk radio. Talk radio will definitely still exist in the future, but the ways of accessing it will probably be different since technology is continuously flourishing. Why wouldn’t there be robots or touch pads or some other “futuristic” thing-a-ma-jig? What a weird prediction. I know.