I wrote an essay. Well, I wrote a speech, I think. I am not sure, I have never written a speech. But the essay had repetitive key clauses that makes it sound like someone campaigning rather than someone entering a contest. The contest was for a prize of $125. The poly-sci dept issued it at school. One of the profs gave out extra credit to his students so they would enter it, which means that I have some competition. I didn't think I would have any, but as it is, a few who go for the extra credit, one of which I know, is taking the LSAT, threaten my chances for winning. Whew, smart gal. I don't know that I am that smart, but maybe I can win the contest. And, the money would be nice.

The question for the essay is: With the uncertainty of the upcoming 2008 Presidential election, is it time for: a woman president, a minority presdient, a mormon president?

I think the idea behind the question was to support one of the three and write about it. At the time I started brainstorming for the paper, I was watching the West Wing. This is something I do often. It helps me to write. They speak with the forethought and vocabulary which I like to write. I wish I could speak that way, but I am just now learning how to think before I speak and have only had a couple years practice at it. I still screw that up as a result. I had finished the second season and went to put in the third season. At the beginning of the third season, they perform a 9-11 tribute. It stirs me to watch that particular episode. It is called Isaac & Ishmael. (I might be spelling the names wrong, but you get it.) It directly answers the 9-11 attacks. It amazes me to see this episode. Strangly, as I watched the small play and it shifted my perception. Instead of seeing the question as choosing one candidate and supporting it, I saw it as a yes or no question. I answered yes.

I don't have many opportunities to write my opinions nor do I write well, but I am including the essay because I worked hard on it and I don't know that anyone will read it (outside of the professor judging the contest) and want some feedback. Know now, this is a long blog.

The essay(maybe speech):

Speaking with one voice, people of varied backgrounds filed for their candidacy for election to the Presidential office in 2008. The time for a president of another race, gender, creed is now. The Forefathers of our country created an idea, a foundation for this country, called pluralism. What started as an impetus to freely believe and worship as they chose, now employs the freedom to elect the office of the President of the United States as the people choose. Let the President believe as she wants to believe. Let the President be who he is and not pretend to be someone we want him to be. Let the President not just exercise the freedoms the forefathers created, but represent them. Let the President be elected based on the populace and their representatives. The idea that our country can have a society that embodies diversity on all levels of government stems from the building blocks upon which the writers of the constitutions constructed this country.

Pluralism challenges the people to utilize their free will to know that something new encourages the office of the President to grow stronger on a domestic and global scale. Changing the norm, while it admittedly presents a challenge, has promises of new diplomacy, peace and power. No one likes change. Change is difficult.

Change has been so difficult for the American people - they had to be told twice that people of color had implicit rights as citizens of this country. The first time cultivated a war great enough that more Americans died fighting in it than in any other war. The Civil War divided our nation, fighting over racial liberation. A second revolution through peaceful protests occurred over 100 years later.

Change is so difficult for Americans that it took 72 years to concede in 1920 that the constitution was clearly written to include both genders, that women have equal rights to citizenship as men. As insurance and clarification the nineteenth amendment was ratified. A second revolution occurred hand in hand with the revolution of race. Women began breaking barriers in the work force. The growing pains of this country lasted more than a century.

Change is so difficult for Americans that the founders of this country in 1773 rose against their authorities to fight for the rights to worship God as they chose. Looking for a new life, a new perspective, knowing that the end result would mean revolution and independence, to choose as they wanted, they went to war. This war, the American Revolution, which lasted for eight years, led to freedom of religion. As reinforcement that the efforts of these men, who fought so diligently and victoriously, would not be in vain, they founded a guiding principle of separation of church and state. This principle allows us to freely practice religion as stated in the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights.

Shifting perception can be a magnanimous event when it comes to convincing 300 million people. Luckily, the shift has begun. The voice of the people can be heard with the listing of the candidates. The people are ready. The people are ready to handle the change commanded by Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin.

These candidates embrace the possibilities available to them through the rebellion of the monarchy in 1776. Standing from their podiums, they shout at the top of their lungs that which you would counter at the top of yours. They are qualified, they are knowledgeable, and they are the essence of the populace voice. The candidates present opinions and solutions to issues that affect the heart and soul of this nation. With tenor, rhythm and pitch they stand heads tall convincing one person at a time the egregiousness of the necessity to vote. Listen to their voice and find one that is agreeable and vote.

In these days of the uncertainty of the coming national election, weighted issues persuade the candidates to voice their answer to the failures of the current administration. The “war on terror” falls short of the promised success in its initial campaign. These failures have generated its greatest weapon, propelling the people to act for change in their leadership. Armed with the same intentions of the Americans from over 200 years ago, the candidates thrive on their diversity. The failures of the current administration promote the pluralistic draw of contenders for the next chance at Commander in Chief. Side by side they stand to be elected, which in turn infuriates the Islamic extremists. Unknowingly, the Bush administration may accomplish exactly what it set out to do: strengthen and protect the country. To win this war, the time for a president of a different gender, race or creed is now.

Change is imminent. Change is difficult. Change is now.