Paperless Newspaper?

Do you get annoyed when the black ink of a newspaper gets on your fingers? Is it annoying when turning big newspaper pages in crammed places like the subway? If so, then you are in luck. At Plastic Logic's factory in Dresden, British engineer Dean Baker has invented a new way to read newspapers. The most significant part of it is that it paperless and highly electronic. This new device looks just like a table mat and weighs as much as a magazine. It is composed entirely of plastic and you can download hundreds of newspapers and browse through them quite quickly.

BBC News reporter Steven Rosenberg interviewed Dean Baker and asked how the new invention worked. Everything, from the screen to the electronics inside, is made of plastic. This is why the electronic newspaper, as Baker calls it, is so light, flexible, and revolutionary. Baker believes that this electronic newspaper will save millions of papers a day because not only can you read newspaper but you can download books and transfer documents to it as well.

Steven Rosenberg asked questions and made comments from both sides of the new invention. Although he was shocked at this gadget, he commented on how the whole point of the newspaper is that you can bring it anywhere you want and the feel of paper is precious to people. The questions he asked were very neutral and concise. I personally like the feel of paper, however, this new device is very environmentally friendly and can speed up the transfer of news at a rate unlike ever before.

Inexperience or Wit?

The 2008 Vice-Presidential debate in my own opinion answered more questions than the Presidential debate did. Both Senator Joe Biden and Governor Sarah Palin addressed every question with accurate and concise responses. i was very surprised at how well Governor Palin held her own in this debate and did not truly think she was going to do as well as she did. Senator Biden definitely answered every question with many facts behind his opinions and kept "throwing punches" at John McCain and his administration. Overall it was a much better debate than the first Presidential debate.

Both CNN and The New York Times stated that Governor Palin's lack of experience showed throughout the debate, "mostly repeating  cliches and tired attack lines and energetically refusing to answer far too many questions." Personally I do not think this is true at all. I felt that Governor Palin has a strong sense of what is going on and what needs to be done. The point that was made on a New York Times article got the most when the author stated, "On Iraq, all Governor Palin had to offer was the false accusation that Barrack Obama wants to surrender..." That is not true at all because Governor Palin specifically said what the Republican plan was in Iraq, which was, "We'll know when we're finished in Iraq when the Iraqi government can govern it's people and when the Iraqi security forces can secure its people. And our commanders on the ground will tell us when those conditions have been met." That states that whatever the plan is in Iraq now, will be the plan for the future. Therefore, if Barack Obama pulls out too soon, then whatever has already been accomplished in Iraq will be lost.

Joe Biden responded with much more supporting evidence than Palin did and i think he won the debate. Both the New York Times and CNN seem to think so as well. Overall the debate went very well and can be seen as a positive outlook on where each candidate stands and who seems to be more prepared for the job.

First Presidential Debate

The first of three Presidential debates went underway on September 26 at the University of Mississippi between Senators John McCain and Barack Obama. Many spectators believed this debate would define what each nominee would do if they were elected into the White House. However, the turnout was quite the opposite. Neither McCain nor Obama directly answered the questions addressed to them. All their answers were generalizations that revolved around the question and kept bringing up the same answers. Even Jim Lehrer, the moderator for the debate, tried to rephrase the questions numerous times and the candidates failed to properly answer them.

Overall, I thought the debate was going to be more entertaining in a debate and political aspect. Both nominees brought up small arguments and somewhat dodged the questions. However, Obama seemed more presentable and directed his main attention towards both the people and McCain. Obama consistently looked at McCain but McCain never bothered to even glance at Obama, which shows me he probably though the was on a higher level than Obama and did not want to be burdened with being in the same conversation as his opponent.

I followed the debate up with CNN, The New York Times, and BBC news. All three sources covered the debate with the same viewpoint as I did. Everyone stated that the candidates did not point to any major adjustments they would need to make to their Presidential duties. Both McCain and Obama focused more on claiming how each other was not well suited for the job. This debate, in my eyes, served as a reminder of how different these two men would be as president. We need to choose wisely as for our economy, politics, and foreign affairs are no where near the condition they need to be.