This argument analysis is on the topic of affirmative action COMMA and the article is written by Gwendolyn Keita Robinson COMMA Ph.D. from Chicago, Illinois. Her central example for this article is Sonia Sotomayor, a new Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. THESIS??????
She ROBINSON begins this article speaking about how people have spoken negatively about Sotomayor and the name she had given herself “Affirmative Action Baby.” It’s almost as if she THE AUTHOR??? is looking for sympathy for her argument using the fact that negative things were said about her to draw the reader in on her side. She is clearly pro-affirmative action and trying to encourage other minorities to strive to be better and use this to their advantage. She then begins to downplay the affirmative action clause and speaks about how Sotomayor got to her place by working very hard as well. She constantly lists other minorities who have also made it to where they are with the help of affirmative action and without. Her argument seems unclear because she goes back and for the between the idea of working hard and achieving your goals without the help of affirmative action as well as using it to get ahead and how it helps. She then states how Sotomayor is one of the most qualified Justices yet EVER?? because she made it from the “rough side of the mountain.” This argument is clearly opinionated because this doctor herself is not qualified to review the qualifications for a Supreme Court Justice. GOOD POINT She begins questioning the readers about the racial minorities grievances and how things should be different, which leads me to believe that she doesn’t want affirmative action in affect. EFFECT She starts to give off an argument of everything should just be equal and fair anyway. She draws to a close expressing how affirmative action is needed and is a major opportunity for minorities. She wants the minority reader to take that chance and use it to their advantage. This article is not very well articulated. The slang and cultural references don’t always help to bring out her argument; they mostly distract you from it. Her side could have been better addressed if she would have stated the facts and simply told how important it was to have affirmative action in our justice system. She chose to make jokes about minorites to connect with the minority reader which made her argument seem less researched and serious.

DON'T USE PRONOUNS SO LOOSELY. IT'S SOMETIMES NOT CLEAR TO WHOM SHE, THIS, AND HER REFER. YOU DIDN'T SPELL OUT THE AUTHOR'S PREMISES, STATE HER THESIS, OR CLEARLY OUTLINE THE LOGIC OF THE ARGUMENT. YOU DO GIVE A GOOD CRITIQUE OF HER WRITING STYLE.