+1(209) 348-9544
order@myessayservices.com
+1(209) 348-9544
order@myessayservices.com
Are you in High School, College, Masters, Bachelors or Ph.D and need someone to help write your essay or research? We offer premium quality essay writing help. All our papers are original, 0% plagiarized & uniquely written by our dedicated Masters specialists. My Essay Services is an experienced service with over 9 years experience in research writing of over 97,000 essays over the years. You will receive a plagiarism check certificate that confirms originality for any essay you order with My Essay Services. Fill the calculator on your right to begin placing your order now!
House plans to Block Obama’s immigration executive actions: Erica Werner.
House Republicans intend to vote in order to block President’s Barack Obama executive actions in immigration. This intends to set up potentially explosive showdown with no certain outcome in the Senate with it considering the legislation regarding Homeland Security. Lawmakers have stressed the point that there is a need for an agency funding especially because of the increasing terror threats in the world.
The Paris attacks shocked and surprised the world, and the lawmakers feel that it is important to understand that the lawmakers try their best to retain funding for the Department of Homeland Security until past February. Obama had given temporary relief in regards to the deportation of about 4 million illegal immigrants. Martha Roby, one of the Republicans that has been meeting with Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy argued that the Republicans are not going to allow the tax- payers money to be wasted on what she described as unlawful orders.
However, it remains unclear regarding the end game as the Republicans are still six votes short of the 60 vote majority that is needed to advance their intended measures. The Republicans have started early in January and consequently they have enough time to figure out things before the expiry of Homeland Security funding that expires at the end of February. The Republicans have made it clear that they intend to use every leverage that they have got in order to ensure that the President illegal actions are not moved forward. Therefore, the looming clash intends to keep Homeland security Department on a short leash while funding for the government continues for the full year.
Patrick: Nix Immigrants’ in-state tuition.
The incoming Governor Dan Patrick of Texas has maintained that he intends to create an ultra-conservative agenda that will help Stream roll the Republicans to what he described as electoral victory. The tea party favorite will be able to oversee the state Senate, and he has been able to pledge hefty property, as well as business tax cuts. Another major change that he intends to do is to push to scrap a popular 2001 Texas law which offers in-state university tuition to children of persons that had come to the United States illegally.
However, Republican governor- elect, Greg Abbott tried to be less confrontational and stuck to his campaign, vows that included the building of roads and the reduction of business regulations. This can be seen to be in sharp contrast with Patrick, who has even left out funding for the next budget for the state public integrity unit. This is a situation that has helped outgoing governor Rick Perry, who currently face abuse of power after vetoing a $7.5 million in state funding in the year 2013.
Patrick has suggested the use of a special prosecutor. This pull-no-punches approach can be said to have outnumbered the Democrats that are feeling more marginalized. Senator Kirk Watson argues that there is a need to go for the GOP that will be able to see beyond party affiliation. Patrick also used the GOP rhetoric and argued that the illegal invasion of immigrants should stop. He has argued that he intends to increase the presence of National guards at the border. He has stated categorically that he intends to do all this and maintains the tax cut plans amid the plummeting oil prices. The governor has stated that the best way, to improve the economy, is to put more money in the pockets of the people.
High Court triggers gay marriage flood-Mark Sherman
It has been noted that the Supreme Court has engineered an increase in the number of States that allow lesbian and gay couples to wed. That increase has raised the chances that in time, there are chances that justices will settle this ever controversial legal debate. There are some justices that have expressed reluctance regarding the issue where more than half the country still prohibits the same sex unions. Florida is the most recent to join in, and this makes it 36 states to allow the marriage and this is nearly twice as many.
It is of the essence to understand that this growth has come from high court’s refusal to review the lower court rulings in favor of same-sex marriage or to block them in order to take effect. The Supreme Court has been able to move ahead and implement the strategy that it started in the October. The Federal court of appeals, which is based in Cincinnati is the only appellate court that still upholds state bans on same-sex marriage.
The justices have decided to meet privately in order to decide whether to add more cases into their argument session. Justice Scalia had warned in the Windsor case in June 2013 that the question of whether states could prevent same-sex couples from marrying would be used to strike down the state bans on gay marriage. He has been proven right after Utah used the case to strike down same-sex marriage.
The opponents of same-sex marriages have fought a losing battle and by losing battles to judges and elected lawmakers that enacted laws, as well as constitutional amendments in many states. Bursch argues that it is ironic that the Federal Court is leading the way in bring sex marriage to the country as many persons have been afraid of taking matters to the federal court which has usually upheld state restrictions.
Cultural diversity pays off, for kids of all ages. Leslie Mann.
Research from the University of Chicago has shown that children, that hear multiple languages in their neighborhoods, are more receptive to people that speak languages that are different from their parent’s language. These children often show a willingness to learn. The study included around 82 children from both Washington as well as Chicago, and it was published in the November issue of Cognition. The children in the diverse communities are actively learning, and Pertman argues that this can also be seen in adoptive families.
Mary Child and her husband David Youtz are raising their family adopted from China in a multicultural environment by purpose. Their children are taking multiple languages, and one reason, that the children do this, is because of the fact that they have appreciated the diverse high school that she attended. Cultural diversity is, therefore, within reach, and this can also be seen with the many national student exchanges programs. One commentator argues that it is the little differences most of the times that make you more compassionate and less judgmental. There are a lot of ways that can be used to expose children to diverse cultures.
Some of the methods that Sabet Tavangar states are taking kids to foreign films. They can at times be taken to sample ethnic restaurants. The children should be made aware of the world around them and that there is the world that exists beyond them. The children should be able to mix with children from other cultures, and one should try to use English with the kids if it is not their native tongue.
Bill Prevents gay marriage being legal in the state: Bobby Blanchard
The Preservation of Sovereignty and Marriage under House Bill 623 intends to prevent same-sex marriage from becoming legal in Texas. In fact, state and local government employees, which will issue same-sex marriage, licenses not be able to get their salaries. In the year 2005, the voters in Texas backed a proposition that defined marriage in the Texas constitution as being solely the union of a man and a woman.
There are several persons that have argued the same-sex marriage ban is unconstitutional and in fact, a San Antonio federal judge intends to go to the 5th Circuit of Court of Appeals in regards to this case. However, state representative Bell Magnolia filed an HB 623 in order to stop any federal court or action from allowing gay marriage in Texas. He argued that the Federal government attempt to create moral standards is plainly unacceptable. However, gay rights group Equality legislative specialist argues that the law goes against the legal precedent of the year 1869. The court ruled that no Texas law should ignore federal law, and it would punish those that do not follow the law. Texas remains one of the 14 states that do not allow same sex marriages in the United States.
References
House plans to Block Obama’s immigration executive actions: Erica Werner.
Bill Prevents gay marriage from being legal in state: Bobby Blanchard
Cultural diversity pays off, for kids of all ages. Leslie Mann.
High Court triggers gay marriage flood-Mark Sherman
Patrick: Nix Immigrants’ in-state tuition.
On Thursday 2 October 2014, President Barack Obama geared his campaign towards ahead of the November midterm congressional elections. While addressing his supporters at Northwestern University, he marked the end of the imbalanced attention from foreign security issues to rebuilding his old relationship with his American supporters. Apparently, in his speech, he laid claims highlighting the poor performance indicated by the economy during his era as the US president (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ). His speech mainly focused at defending his economic policies focused at promoting economy elevation. In his claim, he majorly made claims that his economic policies are the best towards his country’s economic gain.
On the other hand, he made minor claim blaming the Republicans and termed then as the blockers towards his economic policies. In his argument about the economic situation facing US, I strongly agree with his claim defending the strategized economic policies. The discussion has an objective of responding to Obama’s Thursday speech ahead of November elections (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ).
United States is among the highest ranked nations with a stable economy. However, despite the 2008 economic crisis that faced the nation, it contributed to the fall of its dominance in the global economy (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ).
The economic recession placed US under a spotlight, and many critiques used against the crisis. Nevertheless, Obama is continuously playing a significant role towards promoting economic gain of the country. Based on the implemented policies, there was an increase in local and foreign investors in the nation and as well promoted improved standards of the citizens. Nevertheless, in the last years, the overall performance of the policies barely contributed towards the attainment of the laid objectives.
Based on his speech, the unemployment level of US is decreasing contributing to economic recovery of the nation. However, statistics reveals that there are still some families experiencing unemployment situations. Unemployment issues facing these families require immediate attention from Obama prior to the elections. It is essential for a president and economists to differentiate between individual gain and national economy gain. The two have an interrelation as they gear towards improved standards of living. However, unbalanced attention that leads to an emphasis on national economic gain over individual gains prompts negative effects in the nation. In his approach, Obama focuses at creating more jobs that will accommodate these families. Additionally, he states that his policies aim at boosting the wages of the domestic workforce (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ).
Similarly, improved standards of living of domestic families is the main contributor towards national economic elevation. I believe that his abrupt change of attention from oversea issues towards the domestic economy is vital prior to the elections. However, oversea security threats facing US are the major contributors towards the massive economy loss of the nation. I support his shift of attention to domestic issues facing Americans. Strategic policies developed by the president in response to the crisis focus on promoting equality in America (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ).
Bailing out of the auto industry is among the strategized policies by the president. Auto industry elevation will effectively aid in curbing unemployment cases. Auto industry is not only a domestic gain but also a global gain for the citizens. Exposure to the global market through the bailed auto industry will enhance competition with other global companies in Europe. Global competition is important as it promotes domestic industries (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ).
Health is an important aspect in the nation. In most situations, government success measure has a basis on its response to health emergency issues. More so, citizen’s satisfaction with leadership in their country has a reliance on the health policies implemented. Supporting his policies, I believe that the stipulated health law will enhance improved standards of living. Similarly, it will indirectly create employment opportunities to local nurses. Additionally, access to health care services is another important measure of standards of living. Henceforth, as a projected policy, it will promote economy elevation in US (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ).
Economic regain and recovery from the recession experienced in 2008 is realistic. Therefore, there lies a need for recognition of the key success measures prompted over the years. Enhancement of reduction of unemployment issues in US is through the job creation strategies adopted. Despite the inequality in job distribution, it is a vital indicator of the performance record of the economic policies (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ). Obviously, the American economy is broad and equal distribution of jobs requires ample time. Thus, I support the recovery progress status as a crucial indicator of success.
While promoting equality in resource share among citizens, it is important for employers to stipulate minimum wages. The approach curbs worker exploitation and as well promotes equality in the nation. However, in situations where the minimum wage rate is low, a large number of citizens lie below the poverty line (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ). Conversely, they are unable to meet their expenses. Superficially, with the policy of increasing the minimum wage, it can positively promote the standards of living in US. Similarly, it will reduce the number of people below the poverty line (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ).
Taxing, an important act in the economy has great impacts on citizens. Taxing as a tool is important as it aids while dealing with inflation. Additionally, it helps while controlling consumption of some commodities. Raised taxes on commodities lead to increased prices of goods. On the other hand, it reduces the buying power of citizens. Taxing can be a form of demotivation. Increased taxes on incomes is a regulatory policy that can aid in promoting equal distribution of resources. Nevertheless, increasing these taxes for the wealthy will lead to imbalance in the value paid as taxes. His policy of regulating income taxes through maintaining a balanced taxing measure will promote economic gain. Thus, I support his argument of maintaining a balanced scale for both extremes of the wealth share (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ).
The Republicans, on the other hand, are to blame for the slow economic recovery in US. Despite their role in America of maintaining a scorecard for the government, continued opposes from the Republicans is pulling the economy backwards. In their position, they have strong beliefs of increasing income taxes for the wealthy. It is an imbalanced interest, as it will promote imbalanced resource sharing (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ). Additionally, in their claims they demand refinancing of students’ loan. They state that the refinance will aid in curbing unemployment cases. Lastly, they are opposing the move by the government of increasing the minimum wage limit. Therefore, the claim by the president of blaming the Republicans for the slowed rate of economic recovery is valid (Pickler, October 3, 2014 ).
As In the argument above, the discussion, supporting the minor and major claims of Obama in his speech on 2 October concludes with a demonstration of a balanced scorecard of the president. Despite a slowed decrease in the level of unemployment, individuals living below the poverty indicator are drastically decreasing.
References
Pickler, N. (October 3, 2014 ). Obama lays claim to economic gains during speech . The Spokesman Review .
Peer Review
The speech by President Obama opens smoothly with a series of reflection on the founders of America and its constitution (Obama, March 2008). It gives a reflection of the racial discrimination underlying in the country. An attention-grabbing approach is prevalent in the introduction speech based on the nature of democracy practiced in America. There is vivid explanation of the preparation process of the constitution. The thesis of the speech is personal initiative, and perfect union are the only solutions to American racial discrimination. The introduction of the speech makes a review of the main points addressed in the speech (Obama, March 2008).
The speech is well organized. It presents a fine flow of ideas without overlapping of ideas. Based on the examples presented, the organization of the speech reflects on developing the introduction and the thesis statement presented. However, there is a suggestion on the presentation of ideas based on the introductory claims. Grouping these ideas based on these claims is essential as it may aid in improving the attention-grabbing aspect of the speech.
Lastly, the reflection made by Obama on his background situation and relating it to the pastor’s situation is essential to his speech as it creates an interrelation of the pastor’s utters and the segregation society he grew up (Obama, March 2008). The speech by the president is very influential. It makes the listener and readers develop strong feelings towards the underlying situation in America.
On March 18, 2008, President Barack Obama delivered a speech on a more perfect union. The speech presented many messages based on his beliefs towards racism. While beginning his public address during a campaign meeting, he sets off the ball rolling by reflecting on the nation and constitution founders. He states that they made all men equal according to the constitution. However, their acts opposed the constitution since they barely did not practice the idea of equality. Obama’s parents are from different societies; the mother is from a white society whereas the father is a Kenyan. Seemingly, his supporters faced critiques due to his race (Obama, March 2008).
Coincidentally, it was during the campaign period that his former pastor Jeremiah Wright spoke controversial words reflecting on his belief and attitude towards racism. His attitude created unease among many supporters where Obama intervened and supported the pastor. He revealed the society background of the pastor that was full of different forms of discrimination and segregation. The society had a characteristic of prevalence of anger, bitterness and hostility resulting from failure of achieving goals.
These harsh feelings towards other society members contribute to discrimination based on race. In his speech, Obama develops claims on the underlying inequality where he postulates a main claim of uniting towards a common attainment of goals and improvement of services such as health, education and reducing unemployment cases (Obama, March 2008). Additionally, he places a minor claim of taking responsibility of oneself. Responsibility of one’s life is essential while developing a cohesive society without racism. In strongly agree with Obama’s claims regarding the solutions to racism in America. The paper supports the president’s arguments.
Surprisingly, the American constitution prior to Obama highly discouraged racism. Its role in the country was to stipulate laws promoting equality and cooperation between citizens. However, eve after two hundred and twenty years, racism and slavery still prevailed in the situation. Thus, it did not realize its supreme role in America. However, as postulated by Obama, the solution to racism is through cooperation and unity without making consideration on the background of other citizens (Obama, March 2008).
On the other hand, after reading Obama’s speech, it is with a strong belief that the president presented very strong and great points reflecting the social issues facing America. Additionally, he makes a reader perceive and understand the negative impacts of the older generations to the current life. Their acts contributed to the spread of inequality based on wealth possession and employment opportunities. The president proposes that self-initiative is the sole solutions to the underlying issues. In his proposal, taking responsibility of oneself entails taking one self’s life in their own hands without waiting for external factors to introduce change in the society (Obama, March 2008). Change is inevitable. However, change should be an initiative and thus personal responsibility is vital while implementing changes in the nation.
In addition, basing an argument on the pastor’s controversial words on racism, Obama blames the society he grew up in and the influence from the period when he grew up. Obama’s statements bring about an emphasizing feeling on the pastor’s utters. He defends the pastor by quoting the provision made by the constitution. However, he states that his utters were inappropriate. Seemingly, no one is perfect. Hence, everyone bounds to making mistakes. From his defense actions over his former pastor, it is an emphasis on his proposal of taking oneself responsibility and uniting with others without making considerations on their backgrounds (Obama, March 2008).
Towards the attainment of national goals, it is essential laying strategies and measures promoting cooperation. Equality is an important aspect of the country. Equality attainment in a country begins with perception towards others in the society. On the other hand, cooperation is a significant approach mechanism towards promoting equality. Cooperation begins with personal courage of breaking chains against unity. In most situations, united people have access to quality social amenities such as schools and healthcare services (Obama, March 2008). Therefore, while focusing on opening channels that will curb discrimination, citizens have the personal call of taking the initiative of breaking these chains (Obama, March 2008).
Racism has severe negative effects to the nation. It often leads to disunity among citizens. Disunity in a country contributes to objecting groups of people. Thus, the government faces the challenge while implementing policies aimed at improving the standards of living. Similarly, in the end, it leads to inequality in the distribution of opportunities such as job opportunities and resources such as schools and healthcare services.
However, despite stipulated laws and policies against racism, it prevailed in the American society for 221 years. Thus, the nation founders may carry the blame for the delayed solution towards the social segregation issue. Henceforth, laws and policies against racism may not be effective while curbing the social issues. Thus, there is a need for unity among citizens and as well self-initiative attitude towards taking responsibility of personal life and actions (Obama, March 2008).
As in the discussion above, it is vividly clear that Obama claims in the speech, “a more perfect union” is true. The only solution to discrimination and inequality is self-initiative and unity.
References
Obama, B. (March 2008). Transcript of Obama speech. Politico .
Abstract
Free speech is one of the most protected values under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. However, there have been debates regarding what entails protected speech—both direct (words) and symbolic (actions). In the relevant part of the First Amendment, the U.S. Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law…abridging freedom of speech.” but within the context of free speech also emerges fundamental issues such as civil liberties, civil rights, and federalism and the all-important question that this paper seeks to answer is how free speech affects all these concepts.
Keywords: free speech, federalism, civil liberties, civil rights.
Free Speech and Federalism
The freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. In its very basic element, free speech is the “right to speak without restraint or censorship from the government.” however, like any other right protected by the U.S. Constitution, free speech is subject to certain reasonable limitations especially when it is evident that its commission could result into clear danger. The American nation was conceived and came to be because of free speech. Among the first proponents of American independence, Thomas Paine wrote the now famous pamphlet Common Sense imploring the citizens of the United States to fight for independence from a tyrannical British empire. This evidences the very first implications of free speech in the country. At about the same time, Jean-Jacques Rousseau published the treatise that came to be known as The Social Contract in which he argued against the notion that monarchies were anchored on divine authority with the all-powerful right to rule. He counter-argued this belief by stating that it is only the people who have the all-powerful sovereign right to determine the type of government they want. Therefore, from this perspective, one can argue that the American concepts of federalism, civil rights, and civil liberties were birthed by the recognition of free speech as a fundamental human right.
The system of government practiced in the U.S.—federalism—fundamentally divides power between the central government and the state governments. The idea behind federalism is to prohibit the government from exercising absolute control over the people, and so in this regard, this system exerts its own checks and balances. When we examine how the Constitution apportions responsibilities between the central and the state governments, it is clear that the tenets of free speech are espoused in this action. For example, based on how the Constitution delegates power to the states or the central government, these powers can be defined as delegated, reserved, concurrent or implied (Federalism, 2016). The federal government, for instance, can exercise authority only to the extent explicitly authorized by the constitution and thus, if a particular duty is not expressly stated by the constitution, then it is deemed to be a reserved power. This is also the principle behind ‘Implied Powers.’
From the earlier definition of free speech, it can either be symbolical (actions) or direct (words). It, therefore, follows that the protection of free speech allows for the interpretation of the Constitution in accordance with the doctrines of free speech. The Courts, in particular, play an important role in adjudicating this role. From the time the Supreme Court ruled that the guarantee of free speech under the First Amendment applied to the States as well, the implication has been that there are no official distinctions between speech-restricting laws adopted at the state, federal and local government levels (Winkler, 2009). One advantage of this is that it attempts to perpetuate doctrinal equivalence between all the levels of government. However, closer scrutiny shows that this is, in fact, not the case.
Winkler (2009) cites the results of an empirical study that showed that there were disparities in the interpretation of speech-restricting laws passed by the federal government and those passed by State and Local governments. He supposes that “the identity of the government institution behind a law restricting free speech may nonetheless be significant” (Winkler, 2009, p. 154). The study showed that speech-restricting laws adopted by the federal government were more likely to be upheld by the courts as compared to speech restrictions by the other levels of government. For example, from 1990 to 2003, 56% of federal restrictions were upheld by the Courts compared to 26% of State speech restrictions. Local governments fared even worse with only 3% of their speech restrictions laws being confirmed by the Courts. Winkler (2009) posits that this could be due to two critical factors: (a) deference to federal regulations by the Courts and, (b) differences in the quality of lawmaking at different levels of government.
Civil liberties are the constitutionally protected freedoms that allow an individual, for example, to speak freely and also to have access to a fair trial. Nevertheless, with the emergence of various dangers and threats to national security interests, the fear of the occurrence of certain events had led to the violation of civil liberties by the very government mandated by the constitution to protect these liberties. For instance, the fear that radicalized Americans could commit terrorist activities on American soil has significantly impacted the way governments conduct surveillance on its people. Most of the time, this surveillance are done without the authorizations of the Courts (Deflem, 2004). And by engaging in unauthorized surveillance, the government has on many occasions infringed on the freedom of speech and violated basic civil liberties such as the right to privacy.
The same dichotomy is also witnessed in how critics of State/Church separation defend the actions of State and Local governments to promote established State religions. These theocrats argued that the First Amendment applied only to the Federal government and not to State and Local governments. Granted, when it was originally ratified, the First Amendment intended primarily to restrict the actions of the Central government. Most State and Local governments were constrained by their own constitutions (Cline, 2018). As such, the guarantees of the Constitution against seizures and unreasonable searches, against unusual and cruel punishments and self-incrimination, were deemed not equally apply to State and Local governments as they did apply to the Federal government. Consequently, most State governments ignored the American Constitution to the effect that some of them retained State churches.
However, with the incorporation of the Fourteenth Amendment, all this changed. The part relevant to this argument is where it stated that “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the united states, nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of the law; nor deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.” in doing this, the constitution established that all citizens are subjected to all immunities and privileges incumbent to an American citizen. It also meant that States and Local governments were expressly prohibited from passing laws that abridged these constitutional provisions.
A positive impact on civil liberties brought about by free speech is the right of equal and fair treatment especially in Court matters. Conversely, a negative effect was that it created the provision that a person could be imprisoned for associating with illegal groups even when they did not participate in unlawful activities. The Sixth Amendment outlines the fundamental rights of criminal defendants which include the right to a public trial (without unnecessary delay), the right to legal representation, the right to know your accusers and the right to be judged by an impartial jury (Sixth Amendment, 2017). This entrenched the practice of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ and upheld the observation of human dignity in all circumstances. Nevertheless, national security issues that sometimes force the federal government to take action against elements that are suspected of associating with banned groups. In the UK, for instance, proposals are underway to legalize the incarceration of people believed to support the activities of banned groups even if they do not participate in the group’s activities (Walker, 2018).
In conclusion, even though federalism is a good system of government with numerous checks and balances, it has been demonstrated on several occasions how it can promote the violation of fundamental freedoms especially when it comes to matters of national security.
Reference
Cline, A. (2018, August 18). First Amendment and Federalism. Retrieved September 22, 2018, from ThoughtCo.: https://www.thoughtco.com/does-the-first-amendment-apply-to-states-249667
Deflem, M. (2004). Social control and the policing of terrorism: foundations for a sociology of counterterrorism. The American Sociologist, 35(2), 75 – 92. doi:10.1007/BF02692398
Federalism. (2016). Retrieved September 22, 2018, from U.S Legal: https://system.uslegal.com/federalism/
Sixth Amendment. (2017). Retrieved September 22, 2018, from Cornell Law School | Legal Information Institute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/sixth_amendment
Walker, P. (2018, June 6). Anti-terrorism plans 'will make thoughtcrime a reality'. Retrieved September 22, 2018, from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/06/anti-terrorism-plans-cri...
Winkler, A. (2009). Free Speech Federalism. Michigan Law Review, 108(153), 154 – 187.
I take this opportunity to thank all the guests who’ve made it to this auspicious occasion today – a day which marks a significant milestone in the lifeline of our company. 73 years ago, the dream of starting this organization was founded by Celine Vipiana; one that was modeled around the idea of manufacturing luxury made-to-measure shoes for children of high-end clients who wanted quality and exclusive products. Our first boutique was opened in Paris at the 52 rue Malte. Since then it has been a journey of reinventions, self-discovery, and commitment to remain faithful to our ideals and philosophies. The ethos of hard work and quality customer service have not let down this organization as it has moved from strength to strength and gained popularity and trust in the eyes of the public. 1973 marks the year the company made its first expansion program by opening boutiques in Monte Carlo, Hong Kong, Toronto, Lausanne, Beverly Hills, and Geneva. We are now part of the LVMH group – a move that has propelled the organization into even more fame and for which the company is very grateful.
More importantly, today I pay tribute to women all over the world for their tremendous contribution to humanity’s progress. Women like our founder Celine Vipiana dared to dream and managed to change the world. Countless other women are doing the same, not necessarily in fashion but in other fields as well. In today’s world, the power dynamics have shifted significantly, and women are taking the reins of leadership. Notable personalities like Helle Thorning, Yingluck Shinawatra, Dilma Rousseff, Julia Gillard, Cristina Fernandez, and Angela Merkel are proof that time has come for women to stand up and be counted on the world’s stage. These are ladies who have broken the glass ceiling and reached for the sky, and there are more like them out there who I will not mention due to time constraints but whom we celebrate nonetheless. One message that we can get from this women is that women dependency is increasingly becoming crucial for the integration of women into mainstream activities and gone are the days when women could only achieve something through affirmative action. Leadership is not given; it is taken.
The advances in technology have necessitated fundamental shifts in the way companies are conducting business. Celine does not intend to be left behind – it understands that its survival is inherently tied to how it embraces technology and realign its activities to this fact. It is for this reason that today we launch our Céline Instagram page which will not only act as an advertising platform but also as a forum where information can be shared between the company and its customers. A picture is worth a thousand words and Céline’s Instagram page will highlight the uniqueness of our products and where the clients can get them. This move represents a new era of conducting business for Celine and is only the starting point – we also aim to increase our online presence by using other platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. With these, we hope that we will be able to reach and impact the lives of more people and make a genuine impact in the fashion world.
Finally, part of Celine's culture has been to give back to the society because we understand the role the society has played in making the company what it is today. For this reason, we have the Celine Prize that the organization awards to female artists who have shown the most promise in promoting women leadership and independence. This year, this award goes to Angela Breathway for her music which encourages women to take up leadership roles.
Browse More Essay Topics 24/7/365 Support 11+ Yrs in Essay Writing Pay for Quality not Quantity Score that A+ Grade
