Diving into this you see that there may have been some red herring with Governor Kasich trying to divert the question of Obamacare. With Bush's response to this question you see that the audience is mostly likely the younger generation. I think this because he feels compelled to acknowledge children and grandchildren. In turn you find that this is extremely appealing to the audience. When talking about the younger generations as a candidate you hit the bell, most everyone cares about how the choices we make today affect the future and by acknowledging this you create a great amount of credibility for yourself .

There is a huge portion of this argument about supreme justice member Scalia that some Americans just don't quite understand, but the fact that Cruz implements in his statement that he knew him for 20 years makes him credible and therefor appeal to the audience. It is important that at the debate they talk about this because it honors one of our very important members of government and seeing someone’s perspective on what they would do on the event that a supreme justice member were to perish. How they would handle this particular situation is important to the American people.

I think that she answered the question that was asked but she immediately diverted the attention away from her and tried to bring other like Powell and Rice in, this is a clear use of the red herring. Clinton does a great job in bring the audience in and establishing firm credibility but it is also true that Sanders does a really good job at getting the cowed to agree with him which at the end of the is all that rhetoric is about

When it comes to mentioning money in the public debates the intended audience is the adult population, any person that has financial burdens. To implement information about how much a candidate is helping with the initials of our country is an appeal of both logic and pathos. Knowing that money is a big deal for most Americans you, as an American are intrigued with any information that has a dollar value. Then you feel emotional reassurance if you hear that this person is helping.

Beyond the candidates using rhetoric, the commentators also use a form of rhetoric in their question. By asking this question there is a complete shake of credibility, and in a way Clinton is getting her ethos challenged.

In this sentence Clinton uses some pathos in the hope to connect with the Americans that the economy is not working for, they then feel like she understands and in saying that she established some credibility.

Considering the impact that Obama has made the author makes it clear that there is no good of time as not to make changes in the way we think about social inclusion. In general this author does a great job of inspiring the reader to make change happen. The previous though that I had on the bias standpoint was completely wrong. I find that there is no bias and the purpose is informative and persuasive. I think in the logical format of this article comes with a large amount of credibility. Over this entire article shows the thought of someone directly affected by racial views, and gives great insight into the other side of the topic. (AB annotation 5) Works Cited: Cross Jr., Barry. "What Does It Mean For The Field Of Diversity And Inclusion Now That Barack Obama Has Been Elected President Of The U.S.?." Diversity Factor 16.4 (2008): 1-3. Academic Search Premier. Web. 11 Mar. 2016

Over all this is a powerful paragraph and expresses many of the same thoughts that I have discussed in my research. I think that it is great that this author even though he is an African American male acknowledges that Obama is of mixed race and that there is a whole other side that the media do not publicize. I like that he states that there is still so much work to do and because there is on black man that made it that does not mean that all of the problems go away. (AB annotation 5)

This article starts off asking the question that I have researched. The title is what intrigued me; I thought it would be a really good addition to my research. This article is also written by an African American man, which makes it rich in diversity of thought. The author Barry Cross, Jr., is an experienced diversity trainer and organizational development consultant and President and Chairman of Elsie Y. Cross Associates, the firm that publishes The Diversity Factor. He has a great deal of credibility in this area of inclusion and diversity. Most possibly because of a racial bias there will be clear side choosing. (AB annotation 5)

Within the title for this article I think that this author is coming from a really clear view of how to perceive identity. The author Myra Mendible is Professor in the Language and Literature Department at Florida Gulf Coast University in Ft. Myers. She is also serving as Interim Director of FGCU's Judaic, Holocaust, and Human Rights Studies Center. Her work in the human rights makes her credible and perfect to use for my research. This title Post-Racial America: New Myth for a New Age? This shows the importance of the view for post (isms) when it comes to any identity. Many believe because we have moved into a society where for the first time in the history of our country one of our presidents does not have the same skin tone of the 43 that preceded we can now get rid of all the thoughts of racism. I think that the topic runs much deeper than that. There is still a large part of our government that does not represent many superordinate groups our president may be black but he is still heterosexual, of able body, and a big one MALE, like the 43 presidents that he proceeds. I think that the claim is right here in the title. Claiming that the way that some Americans see isms is that they don't exist but this article proclaims the post-racial view as a myth. I particularly like this because it acknowledges that we still have so far to grow in this area and this is something that I push for personally. (AB annotation 4)

Philip is an author from Europe. He moved to Brooklyn, N.Y. I think that as a white man looking in to the topic the conversation of racial prejudiced he only knows one side of yet over his work he is very credible. He wrote in the Globe, he wrote books such as 1992’s “Divided We Fall: A History of Ethnic, Religious and Racial Prejudice in America,” and for magazines and newspapers such as America, The Pilot, the Christian Science Monitor, and the Social Justice Review". In this work I find that this establishes some credibility over the topic of diversity inclusion.(AB annotation 3)Works Cited Perlmutter, Philip. "The Decline Of Bigotry In America." Society 46.6 (2009): 517-521. Academic Search Premier. Web. 10 Mar. 2016.

Considering the information given here, these statistics have little to do with Obama and his effects on the country. From this information you can see that the rise of diverse thinking has been in progress for a long time. It is important to acknowledge that the rises in changing thoughts around identity prior to Obama's election helped set him up with a running start so that he was better equipped to handle the topic. (AB annotation 3)

It is in my belief that in the past eight years we have moved from this way of thinking and moved into more understanding about institutional prejudice. But it is really significant to highlight the influence that of Obama has when it comes to social inclusion. (AB annotation 3)

This article The Decline of Bigotry in America, by Philip Perlmutter (who is a very credited author) is approaching this topic in a new way at a new perspective. He, he author makes it clear though his claim that racism is not dead yet it is nowhere it used to be centuries ago. Yes, I would agree with this statement yet when people try to bring up how far we have gotten in the push for equality they seem to leave out how far we still have to go. In this article it reads, "the presidential election of Barack Obama proves how wrong pessimists and paranoids have been about race and prejudice in America". This is a commonly said phrase, it almost sounds as though he is disputing his own claim that racism is not dead, as though having a black president fixes everything. I find that in this article there is lots of bias even in the first paragraph because it gives a strong opinion and uses words such as victims and victimizers to describe the connection between identity and Americans. In general this is pretty relevant information just because it shows a different side of the argument. (AB annotation 3)

This quote is maybe the most important of my research so far. This speaks directly to my topic question and in a ten line overview of what Obama says pretty much answers it. In this article, Obama emphasizes the significance of social inclusion most importantly in government. By incorporating the categories of gender, race, religion and background this is an explicit representation of an attempt of Obama's focus on changing the way Americans view diversity. With in the article there is a clear understanding that they support the influence of Obama and therefor may have very small about of bias. Yet facts are facts and this author presents the facts as a way to capture the audience and solidify logic and credibility. Works Cited Augoustinos, Martha, and Stephanie De Garis. "'Too Black Or Not Black Enough': Social Identity Complexity In The Political Rhetoric Of Barack Obama." European Journal Of Social Psychology 42.5 (2012): 564-577. Academic Search Premier. Web. 10 Mar. 2016(AB annotation 2)

Within the idea of unifying superordinate identities this is particularly important with thinking about the topic of how president Obama has influenced the view on identity in America. In my own experience I have felt a great unification of minorities, I've seen superordinate identities come together in a single hope of equality. Through my research I have found very few, in fact no opposing argument that would deny the recent togetherness of the superordinate identities. (AB annotation 2)

Of course there are some bias in perception of race whether that be with whites or blacks. We saw in the last article that whites were less likely to vote for Obama in correlation with the darker they perceived his skin tone, this prejudice holds true with the black population also. First by rejecting the fact that Obama is black in the first place blacks then being less supportive when considering him as a multiracial candidate. This supports the claim of the authors here because of the rejection of Obama "blackness" leads to the comprehensive ideology of racial and social discourse. (AB annotation 2)

This perspective is most likely from the stakeholder viewpoint of the citizen. I think this because it is not politically correct to analyze the fact that someone is "too black, or not black enough". Considering the fact that president Obama was criticized for this holds significance because it shows that because someone does not fit the mold of what it means to be black or African American the get criticized. This in turn demonstrations the view that we are moving further away from social and identity inclusion. (AB annotation 2)

Being an African American myself I understand some of the disadvantages that exist and strive to defy them, so I can imagine the challenges that he faced in his candidacy. I think that the claim is, bearing in mind all of the factors that Obama has overcome, still analyzing the idntity and social discourse that is prevalent in our society. (AB annotation 2)

Through this abstract they hit some points that are important to my research. First covering the importance of Barack being the first African American president and how this is a huge step in history of America and the world. I think that in mentioning this they establish some credibility. In the purpose of this article you find the relevancy to my research, how Obama attended to and managed his social identity is a big factor in monitoring his effects on the rest of the country. (AB annotation 2)

Overall there is firm understanding on how skin color or perceived skin color affects support for political candidates. One question that comes to mind form the quote above is that if they found that skin tone is not significantly correlated with racial prejudice what are the other factors to consider in the context. Throughout the article there is no clear bias, it is consistently factual and objective. The information provides greats insight on the subject, and clarifies understanding on influences that changed the support of President Obama in his previous years. The stakeholders in this article seem to be wholly focused toward the political influences so that would be the voter and political candidates. (AB annotation 1) Works Cited West, Tessa V., et al. "Racial Attitudes And Visual Cues In Political Judgments: Support For Obama During The 2008 Presidential Election." Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology 20.4 (2014): 583-590. Academic Search Premier. Web. 9 Mar. 2016.

Looking at the initial thoughts about Obama can better help us understand the shifts that we are currently seeing in the view on social, political, racial diversity. Considering that some associate darker skinned people with danger or threats is a thought that could have been predominant for a long time. This particular portion of the article is a huge buttress for the authors claim. When considering who one wants to vote for you would never go with the option that you feel threatens you, and to see that some felt this way shows how complex the racial attitudes are. (AB annotation 1)

Since the election of president Obama in 2008 there has been a plethora of influential events that have followed in my opinion there has been many ways that president Obama has had a great influence on our country. One in particular is the country's view on diversity and identity. From the election of our first us president there has been 219 years of white or Caucasian presidents, in 2008 the election of our first African American president showed a huge shift in the way that this country thinks. In doing extensive research on Obama's effects on the country you can see there is a huge pool of opinions and stakeholders on the subject. Given the influence of president Barack Obama over the topic of identity and diversity there were and are many people that have a fixed mindset when it comes to the subject of inclusion of minorities in positions of power. In this article Racial Attitudes and Visual Cues in Political Judgments: Support for Obama During the 2008 Presidential Election by Tessa V. West, her claim is that there is complexities in the racial attitudes encompassing the election of 2008. One can see from quote above that the diversity among thoughts is significant and relevant because although it is predetermined that not everyone is going to have the same out look on the president the way you perceived him and his skin tone did directly affect for some the support or lack thereof. In 2008 I suggest that this was a common view for many Americans and affected the political influence on the ordinary citizen (AB annotation 1)

You can see that in the conservative perspective they make it more about the phone and the FBI forcing Apple to help with the access of information and then they bring it to a bigger idea and make it about future cases and control over the company and wether or not they can be forced in the future. In whole you can see that they support the fact that Apple should give in regardless of the cost and the cost is where the more liberal view stands.

From the more conservative approach you see that they dive deep into the story from the beginning they mention what kind of case it is and that a judge cant force Apple to give help with access of the phone. One major difference that i see in this is that at the liberal stand point they want to focus on the cost and this article is more about the case in general.

From the liberal view they try to voice the opinion of Apple. The conservative side was not as interested in understanding why apple wanted to do the appeal from accessing the phones files. the big difference that I see overall is that they are not really telling the same story. One side is more interested in the case and knowing what the phone will do to help that, and the other side is kinda picking a dsde and explaining the cost that it would take for apple to help.

From the more liberal news you see that they are making the first part of the story about the cost that it would take the for apple to help the FBI.

For me this relates to episode 5 of serial and how the gave time for the strangulation of Hea but because she was a big athletic women, the time for struggle would have been much more time so the time line that thy came up with in that episode could have been effected by what this doctor is saying.

Bring this up in class you must understand that although there was lots of thing wrong with Jay's story this is something that can't be refuted. He knew where the car was and only a person that had some involvement with the case would have know this information. With the shiftiness in Jay's stories there is not much credibility there yet because he could find this car for the detectives this gives him lot of cred and lets the prosecution know that this knowledge of where the car was goes a long way.

I think that overall the story is just coming from one point of view and seems a bit bias. Jay is telling his story and even though they are pointing out the inconsistencies in Jays story he is really thr only on that gets to tell his part.

I like that in this narration of events everything is mapped out by time yet I think it is a little hard to follow with different narrators going back to back. the difference in reading style makes this particular podcast hard to listen to. I think that the following of questioning by the cops makes this a credible outlet for analysis

This seems to be a credible source yet there is a bit of bias seeing as this is the perspective of Jay.

This is also highlighted in serial, the reaction. I think that the story that Jay gives is probable, I can see a person that is known for being perfect taking it hard when others see them as a loser. I think this is important because finding out what kind of person he is can give insight into how he might react to the breaking up. Because this was his first real relationship there is chances that the reaction to the break up would have been very hardly handled.

Something that continues in this interview is the attempt to understand what kind of person Adnan was. What jay thought about him and how others saw him was something that was important to the case, because trying to find out what kind of person he was can help with the motive behind the murder.

it is really power that even in this perspective they identify Jay as the star witness. That much because he is although there was parts of the story that did not match up there was a lot of the sore that made too much since to avoid. It holds true in the first part of this review that without his help there would have been no case against Adnan.

This is something that hit the media by storm. 50 women coming out and saying that this had happen is something unheard of in past convictions. Some questions that I would ask here would be... was there enough evidence to convict Kosby? How well in detail did his defence work? because I followed this case i know some places to get some of my questions answered. I know that CNN covered this story over the course and many other news stations did as well that would be the first step to getting the answers that i need.

i think that some questions that i have about this particular subject would be... should one give credit to Obama for such a huge effect on America? Will there be a huge change in the way people see race and identities after his presidency. Some things that i might want to look up for this are other presidents that have had a huge effect on similar concepts and how they directly influenced the country. Looking into a variety of different social media could help give clarity on how people think about Obama's influence.

Coverage over the presidential race is big, overall there is a great amount of credibility in this just because it is a well publicized event. Talk on political money brings up lots of question, in the end both candidates want to be funded to continue in the race. With the political flow to this coverage it is hard to say whether or not the appeal ethical or logical but some how become one.

Thinking about how and why someone goes about killing another is like trying to figure out why the wold exist, there is just so many things to consider. For Adnan trying to pick apart his brain is not really effective because to think that this seemingly normal kid could kill some one doesn't speak to the facts on weather he did or did not. Koenig does a great job on attempting to involve credible people to support what she is trying to say. by speaking on his character this incorporate a pathos appeal trying to relate him to an ordinary teenager is very appealing. over all Koenig does a great job in keeping herself credible and believable.

Overall there has been a voice to the character of Adnan and trying to understand his character has really been one of the top objectives in this story, because in some way the character perception of every one else equates to guilt of innocence. This person like many others says that Adnan was charming and used his charm to defuse of wiggle out of things, and this makes him a murderer. in my won personal opinion every outside perspective of Adnan hold no statue in the case he and he alone is an answer to his character because he knows who he is. Knowing that good people commit crimes is very important, proclaiming your innocence is not something some one else really does for you.

Because the fight for cancer is so prevalent in todays wold the tittle alone was good enough to draw me in. Understanding world events as they pertain to science is something that is really important. wanting to know more about how the worlds making progress with something so big creates awareness and in that sense is very credible.

This title in it self is really important because it show the best of both world Taylor Swift a multi grammy winner and a rap genius Kendrick Lamar the wudiance woud really be captured by this tittle as I was.

Laura explains that there was no phone by or in the best buy. this detail that seems to be so small and insignificant means so much as Koenig employs. Because Laura is speaking off her personal knowledge this creates some credibility but understanding that she was there to steal from the store helps and hurts the credibility. Knowing that she was a thief may lead to other questions about whether she is trust worth and if she could be lying. Yet because she was stealing and was aware of the features of the store this supports her claim and therefor her credibility.

There is a really big logical appeal here. the break down and combining of old and new evidence is really playing a huge part in the claim that the 2:36 call really was the call that was made to pick up Adnan from the murder. This 3:15 call messes with Jays story yet doesn't all the factual evidence that has been found mess with Jays story. If there is no clear evidence the credibility on jays part once again is shaken. Koenig is doing a great job with the structure of her argument that there is no room for error.

I think that the appeal that Hillary has for the 35% of younger women is one of pathos and logos. As every one knows if elected she would be the first female president and knowing that the world is past due for change, the women of the 21st century have come to realize the importance of femininity empowerment. she comes of as a logical pick that because she is the only woman in the race, and she appeals to the emotion of many americans not just women. Overall i think that it is a powerful movement and that the 64% for Sanders in stinging wound for Clinton.

First and for most what drew me to this story was the simple fact that the Broncos won the supper bowl and that Manning is a great icon in the NFL world and it was interesting to see him targeted for something of such little importance. To find out that he was not payed for this particular line seems to be a bit untrue but i have no need in questioning in. I find that the credibility of this mostly honest man and the company itself is over good enough to believe in #ethos

Over this subject there is a really big concern world wide with the hunting of wales it hits many environmentalist in the heart to know that they might be another species to add to the endangered list and then holistically to the extinct. There for there is that appeal of emotion/pathos. There is also a very big ethical appeal to this situation if all the whales die off then there are many things that can happen to the world that could be detrimental our way of life

When on this topic of useful information from Adnan he really cant give any solid evidence for the reason that some things just don't add up for his defiance. Koenig is asking all the right questions and Adnan doesn't have any of the right answers. This is a little shaky in itself. For the appeal factor this seems to run deep because you have feeling that are raging and Koenig does a great job of keeping the reader entertained and on the tip of their toes by knowing what to ask that get the emotions raging and knowing who to ask, this all helps with her credibility. Koenig talks to the reader as though she is having a conversation with them and this appeals to the readers emotions as though we are some how in the story.

Thinking about this talker Enright she seems to be very credible in the since that she help in a case that was similar to Adnan's and she currently does similar work trying to get people that were wrongfully convicted to be released for their sentence. because she is a person that has this authority she there for speaks with authority. Understanding that she has lots of questions about the case is great because you get that connection that we is pulled into the story just as we are.

This video had much controversy and there was simple reason behind the video and it was to appeal. I think that the video was not meant for that average Beyoncé fan it was a specified target audience that much was clear. In the video there is a slowly sinking COP car that symbolizes many things but manly the police brutality among the African American population. This is a credible topic not only because of past events that main stream but because Beyoncé is an African American and with the pro black movement that many AA artists have accommodated into their music. This video also has lots of pathos appeal, and you can see that through the hurricane Katrina clips that are shown with in video it self. Knowing how bad of a time it was for the people of Louisiana during that time there is huge emotional pull. There is also much power and credibility with showing this because it acknowledges that the fight is not over.

In my opinion this joke makes such an impact on the reader and it is an appeal of pathos you in a way get the felling that she is just a normal person as well and you become emotionally involved because of this understanding. When a person jokes about something in a situation as serious as this you find humor as a way to relief the boredom and stress of the story.

Knowing that Jay doesn't want to really be involved in the murder, he says many things that incriminates him and because he continues to change his story there is no way that he is credible.When it comes to the understanding of jays story there is really no ethical appeal. It is really hard to get the felling of trust with his story because of the lack of consistency and in this case being consistent equals a bit of credibility. Koenig continues to be credible in her telling the story in my opinion because she non-bias and knows that there are things that don't support Adnans story and she acknowledges that somethings don't add up and to me being non-bias in this situation adds credibility

In my belief this sentence is a logos appeal because it shows the significants and the logical break down of the events. Koenig gains my trust not only because of this sentence but because of her understanding of story and how logical it seems.

I think that this is important to the whole story because with the problem of memory you must have mental anchor to keep track of the events of this day and Asia herself said that if it weren't for the snow she would not had remembered that day. Just in the mind of the reader one would think that the events seem to be probable. I think that the author is credible in the sense that she is giving this information willingly she also notices very curtail parts of the story line that helps with understanding of the story.

This shows lots of significants with the approach of the author. She uses the word "innocent" which in a read like this has much power so the appeal is very intense in this couple of sentences. you have the understanding that if she gets this evidence then as she said he is really innocent and that in it self is very appealing to the reader.

I think that it was very interesting that Asia would withdraw from the previous information that she had given and say that the letters that she wrote were because of the pressure that the family put on her. Though it surprised Rabia this is not very uncommon in long standing debatable cases many witnesses that have moved on with their lives choose to stop with any information that may help or hurt the case in wish to continue with a normal life. I believe that that was the reason behind the withdrawal of Asia McClain

Tracy Sullivan (traysull)