Sarah Palin

This work was made by
Nuno Cruz (30583) and Carlos Fonseca (29877)
__________________________________________________

1. Explain the title of the article

The title of this article is in direct relation to the "american dream",
an utopia once again recovered and used by the republicans to gain favoritism
in the more smaller (and usually southern) states. And Sarah Palin, the chosen candidate for the vice presidency, is the epitome of such mith, that seems can no longer be applied to the current united states, or even believeable by most, something that was proven with Obama's victory.

2. How have the Republicans used the myths of small-town America to their political
advantage?

This strategy was developed to gain the empathy and trust of the more modest and patriotic
americans, especially through nostalgia. Sarah Palin, who wasn't well known in the world of politics, entered the spotlight of the elections, and gave the viewers what they wanted to see:
A perfect "average" american who's just like everyone else. However, the truth is she was merely a political figure, a kind of icon made purposely to give the right-wing militants a sense of moral and national rightiousness.

3. Why is this tactic difficult for Barack Obama's campaign to counter?

First and foremost, the democrats have no similar mith to counter with. The second aspect
that made it more difficult for Obama is that democrats do have the facts, and the more than obvious failure of the Bush administration made the road softer for Barack's campaign. But americans do love stories more than facts, and fear change, some more than others; and Obama doesn't have that kind fully flegded biography to fight in the same lines; and his racial background certaintly doesn't help in the more conservative states. Obama is in fact, the opposite of the myth that Sarah Palin ressurected; While the republicans uphold past Reagan values and national ideals, the democrats are looking at the future of change: a multiracial society where aging fantasies cannot exist anymore.

Graffiti comment

In my opinion, Graffiti is a way of art, that defines the feelings and expresses ideas and thoughts of the creators.
In the beggining, Graffiti was created to define the territories of the gangs, but some time later, some art critics started noticing that those "paintings" were actually great expressions of art and some of those graffitis are even exposed in art galleries.
Nowadays, famous people spends large accounts of money buying graffitis to expose in their houses or private locations, as the text shows, and that is one kind of proof that graffiti can be useful and beautiful, because it is a great way to express our feelings and we dont need any type of studies or learnings to do it.
It´s true, in the other hand, that one neighbourhood with graffitis can be a litle bit scary if you don´t know that place or the people that live there, but its ridiculous to say that graffiti is an "eyesore" and an act 0f vandalism.
In my opinion, it shouldn´t be forbidden to do graffitis, but start creating special areas where anyone can paint whatever they want, despite of loving that way of art, i think it is a crime to paint in areas like building or spaces that dont belong to us.
I think also that it still exists too much prejudice against this art, because most of the people when they watch one "tagger" paint on the streets, still think that it was a junkie or a delinquent the author, and don´t believe that some artist can earn money and live by doing those marvelous creations and showing them around the world.

Hello, my name is Nuno Cruz, I'm student number 30583, LRE I.
This is my english culture blog.

Thank you for your visit.