Would things be different if Sandusky were black or Latino? I want to laugh at this question. It’s hard to fathom a minority committing a crime of such properties. History serves as an example for these crimes being committed by a Caucasian male more often than any other race. With that being said, I think that the overall response to the crime if Sandusky were black would be of shock, similar to that of people when it was revealed that the DC Sniper was an African American. I believe that there would be no cover up of the crime. I’m sorry to say but I feel as though if Sandusky was black, McQueary would have reported straight to the police. But, for argument’s sake, let’s say the cover up did take place. Sandusky’s only punishment was that he was banned from the locker room. We all know that a black Sandusky would’ve received far worse punishments. The media coverage would be extensive at first, but I believe that it would simmer down at a rate far faster than what is occurring now. I feel as though that Paterno would have not gotten fired because the focus would not be placed on anyone but Sandusky. Because of this, the riot would not have taken place. However, it would simply be regarded as another minority committing a crime. On top of that, I feel as though if he were a black man, a lot of focus would be on the African-American PSU students. The media would have asking questions like, “How does the black student union feel about what is going on?” (because one black person knows how all black people are feeling). Though, I won’t act and say that everything would be completely different. He would’ve still been painted out of the moral in front of the book store, received hot fire, and cinderblock thrown through his window. Overall, it’s safe to say that things would be different if Sandusky was black or Latino.

This whole PSU scandal I feel doesn’t really affect me. Well, it does but I don’t feel it, it’s more like I’m just watching what is going on around me. The real reason I choose to answer this question was to talk about the media, more importantly, Joe Paterno. I love Joe, he did nothing wrong. The media portrays him like the bad guy and he really isn't. He didn't touch the boys and as soon as he found out he reported it. Not only once but multiple of times and every time he was told that it was being taken care of. People often forget that, just because he is the face of the school, he is just a football coach. He did all he could. Furthermore, he couldn't have done anything else (though he wished he had) for legal reasons. People want to jump on the (excuse my language) "fuck Joe" bandwagon but don't have the full story. They just have what the news feeds to them. All this nonsense about Joe this and Joe that, like there aren’t victims. Additionally firing him was unnecessary; he was retiring at the end of the season anyway.
There is one child molester on trial at the end of the day, which you read (hopefully) in the 23 page report. Joe is the only person, in this same report, to have reported anything in the first place. A man was Sandusky in the act of raping a child and yet that person did not go to the police. So how can you tell me that Joe has to go down even though he reported the incident right after he was told by someone who was not strong enough to do it. If it wasn't for that we wouldn’t know about this situation and the media wouldn't be tearing him down because it would still be happening. Nothing would have been done. Joe was taken down by both the media and the board of trustees because they had to make it seem as though they were doing something about what is going on here. The two people indicted on the charges of not reporting these incidences are walking free and the one man to do what he was legally bound to do has been fired. This situation isn’t as black as white as people want to make it seem, as the media wants to make it seem, none of that. It’s even more difficult to take in as a student of a school that takes its figurehead and spirit so strongly. They took him down wrongfully at the end of the day and that’s the truth. He didn't do anything; Sandusky did, even though no one has said his name from the moment he got arrested. Media wants to portray him as a god but he’s just a man. It’s easy to stand outside a situation and judge those involved, so if you're not in the situation you be that and just stay out of it. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. In no way is the firing of Joe in anyway more important than what happened to those kids. But, what we should be focused on is Gary Schultz (but you never hear about him) who is the one who messed up. People let their emotions over cloud what the facts are. I'm on the side of moral. From the outside looking in PSU handled the situation poorly and took the easy way out by firing those who were put in the spotlight by the media and standing by those who the attention should really be on because they aren't the face of the institution.

I wouldn’t call it taking advantage of American laziness, I feel like they’re just taking jobs that Americans simply won’t do. From the videos we see that most Americans get the jobs and quit within the first few hours or the span of a first day. A whole industry faces massive losses because of this. And it’s not as if it’s any industry, it’s the food industry facing massive setbacks which everyone knows is a basic need for life. Now if immigrants were taking jobs on Wall Street or doctor’s offices this would be a different story. Now you might be thinking “but there are immigrants on Wall Street and in doctor’s offices,” but they aren’t as massive in number as they would be say on a farm, in the number of field workers, etc. In all honesty our society needs these immigrants to survive. The United States produces about 90% of the food that we need by way of immigrant workers, because Americans won’t pick vegetables and fruits. If the number of immigrants plummets either A food prices are higher or we become one of the countries that’s dependent on other countries to feed us. So I doubt that you would want any of those two options. So now we know that Americans won’t take the jobs and we need them to be filled. Would you classify this under American laziness? Because I certainly wouldn’t. Why not take the better job that requires less grueling work? And if this laziness, then I don’t feel bad at all if immigrants take these jobs, because all that matters is they get done.

How do I feel about immigrants living in America illegal or not? Well that is a very loaded question. I will admit that I am a bit biased because I don’t live in a community that is very much affected by immigration. With that being said, I do not mind immigration. Our country was built on different nationalities and cultures. That’s really what makes it great. So, to have bad feelings on the topic doesn’t seem right. The word immigrant has a negative connotation permanently stuck on its back and it isn’t right. But I guess we can’t change that anytime soon. So then we come to the issue of legal as opposed to illegal. Obviously there is nothing wrong with legal immigrants. My parents are legal immigrants and have been in America for about 27-28 years (but once again, I’m biased). People that come over to the U.S. are usually people that are ready to work hard and can do a lot of good for this country. And then there was illegal immigration… okay so I know it’s illegal, but I totally understand why people do it. I’d be lying to you if I said I didn’t know any illegal immigrants. The processes for getting into this country is too much, it’s just too much. The U.S. makes foreigners jump through loops to only get a visa. God knows what kind of trick you have to do to get a green card. I know a man that has been in this country for 30 years and he still can’t get citizenship. My father finally got his last year after being here for almost 30 years. Seeing all of this ahead of you doesn’t really encourage you to do things the legal way. On top of that, America has got some nerve because our citizens are allowed to go almost anywhere without going through similar loops. So I guess what I’m trying to say is that I feel bad for immigrants. They work hard to get here to have a better life, only to have to jump through rings of fire and face scrutiny when they get to the other side. They’re still people.

I want respond so bad... but you've actually rendered me speechless and I didn't even read the whole thing.Shaking my head

I’ll start by saying every week these questions get worse and worse. Does hanging out with a group whose race is not your own make you a poser? Well to accurately answer this question, we need to know what a poser is. A poser is “one who pretends to be someone they are not.” A poser does something for the sake of looking cool or trendy. That being said a poser has nothing to do with race and depends on the person. It could, but, overall no it doesn’t. Being black, if I hang out with a group of Asian but I’m still acting like me then I’m not a poser. I just so happen to enjoy the company of Asians. Then there are people who don’t have any choice because of certain situations. I know many of my friends that spend the majority of their time with white people but are not any different than when they spend time with black people. At the end of the day, people are people and they’re going to hang out with whomever regardless of race. However, that’s not to say that these so called “posers” do not exist. I’ve meet many people who try to hang out with a race that’s not their own, but, instead of being real, they try to adopt the tendencies of the other race. Sure sometimes traits can rub off on people but, there are people who just try so hard to be something they are not. And god knows why. We all know that stereotypical white guy that hangs out with black people and thinks he’s one too. He dresses like them and even tries his hardest to act like them. Now, is he’s a poser? Yes, yes he is. Wiggers aren’t just a figment of our imagination. So for the most part I would say no, hanging out with a race that’s not your own does not make you a poser. It is sad that in today’s society people can’t just hang out without people wondering and asking questions.

Your race or the race you associate has a lot to do with the way you view the world. I’m not saying that it’s completely dependent but it does play a part. There is a culture associated with almost every race. Because there are so many other races, it’s almost impossible to know about all of them. Thus, the stereotype is born. You view everyone by their stereotype and acknowledge it as how the world is. For instance, if you’re not black, you assume black people all dance and are good at sports (well all except hockey… too cold). If you’re not Chinese, you assume that they are good at math and they know somebody that owns a laundromat. Finally, if you aren’t Mexican, you might think they are all hard workers and are/know someone who is an illegal immigrant. However, we all know that these aren’t true (at least not 100% of the time). It is still very useful for story telling though. Based on stereotypes, if I were to tell you, “Amanda and I had a disagreement,” and she was white, you might think of a calm, civilized disagreement. But, if I were to tell you she was black, you might think of a much louder conversation. Then there is the fact of racism. No one wants to look like they’re biased when it comes to races (we all know what happened to the last guy who said his race was the best). I’ve seen plenty of white people give up in an argument because they didn’t want to look racist. But wait, what does this have to do with how we view the world? Well because we are all different races, we have ideas of other races that effect how we deal with other people because that’s just how the world works.

Is that Talking to the Moon playing in the background? I think so. But, on to the question posed: How do you feel about that when women go out they sacrifice their comfort but when men go out they don’t? Well to be honest I don’t really care, partially because it’s 100% true and partially because it’s all part of societal norms. As a woman, I know when I go out I have a choice in what I wear. The argument made is that women want to be sexy so the sacrifice their comfort. Truth is there is plenty of ways to look good that doesn’t involve skin tight miniskirts and stilettos (yes I know, shocking). In reality you shouldn’t own anything that makes you uncomfortable anyway. When it comes to guys, I can’t think of anything they could wear that wouldn’t be comfortable. Even if there were I don’t know if I’d want to see it. I know I don’t want to see a guy in short shorts, hairy legs hanging all out with his knobby knees. However, just like women, men have to dress a certain way too. Just because it’s a common look, people tend to overlook it. Sure jeans and a button down isn't anything special but we all know if a man showed up in sweats he wouldn’t be taken seriously. Of course, no one would be taken seriously if they showed up in that, but, someone in an old wore out tee wouldn’t get taken seriously either. Women like me sharp, crisp and clean looking (in other words, look like they had some sort of proper upbringing). Women dress in what men like to see and vice versa. My second point would be because of them. Every person, not just women, have expectations for themselves. When you look in the mirror you want to like what you see. If that look consists of a short skirt and high heels then, hey, power to you. No one should dress for somebody else. It may influence how you dress but it’s not 100% what’s on your mind. Sure dressing roles are different but I wouldn't say that it's unfair to girls because of comfort reasons.

What is the best way to provide aid to foreign countries? I debated answering this question because, honestly, I didn’t want to seem insensitive to the topic. So, let’s start off by saying that throwing money at a problem won’t fix it. Though this may be a horrible example, but, let’s say a man gets into a car accident, throwing money at the car won’t fix his car. Sure you can pay someone to fix it and now you’re like, “that solved the problem.” Not really, the investment you made fixed the car and unless the driver learns how to drive correctly, he’ll most likely have to make the same investment over and over again. So, basically the same rules would apply for a country.
What I’m saying is that there’s nothing the USA can do to help other countries. Sure it’s a nice idea to give other countries money to try to solve their problems but in reality money is just a temporary solution. You can’t give people food and expect them to survive. You have to teach them how to cook. Let’s take Haiti for example. Watching the video on Clorene’s business, it’s evident that pumping money won’t do anything to help her. What would help is helping her set up a business plan and how to handle her business.
The real way to help is to try to teach them how they can better themselves to operate as their own nation; with the full support of their own people.

I want to start off by saying watching these videos were very interesting. It’s not all good but, interesting none the less. The first set of video I watched was of Clorene Blaise, the lady that made clothes and bags out of jeans. I want to start off by saying I was very disappointed with her business. First off, the fact that she used tags from other companies was very tacky and unprofessional. Sure, you may be thinking, “That’s not fair; she’s in a poor country with limited resources.” True she is, but, I’m sure she has cloth and a sharpie marker. And yes, I’m aware that that too is tacky but it gives her her own mark. When I buy a shirt, I know its value by the tag. Having all those different logos is just confusing. But, that’s just from the business side of me. Also I’m sure that’s illegal. My second point is I don’t see this company being very successful. From my knowledge, most Haitians know how to sew. The quality of her clothing appears to be poor and not any better than what anyone can do. On the up side, it seems as though she has some original ideas and designs that may attract customers. As for her problem for cloth, maybe she should go into the business of producing cloth instead. I’m sure that this is a problem for her that other small companies could have the same problem.
The second video I watched was of Madame Lamour, the wedding florist. Side note, it’s so Haitian that they’d have “Madame” rather than her first name. I like this business way better than the first one. But me being me, I have to hate something about it. I didn’t like the questions being asked. For example, “how do you keep records?” and “how do you talk to brides in the united states.” The interviewer fails to realize that there is a culture difference. Things such as records and internal business aren’t top priority.
It may seem as if I was a little hard on the Haitians but that’s just because I am one. I feel that many of their problems have to do with the way the culture is and the values that they keep. Someone started their blog by saying, “Haiti needs our help.” Maybe they do, but you can’t help someone that is too proud to help themself.