inFLo

This is the first topic that I'm writing about. To tell you the truth, I went to school for graphic design and I have a fair amount of experience in photography. The reason for this photo to the left is to express my first point.

Setting up a pleasing compositon is a very important stage in photography. Imagine there is a 3X3 grid over the image you are considering capturing. For example, if you are taking a landscape, a favorable image would be to have either the ground or the sky to take up 2/3 of the picture. In this example the ground takes up 1/3 and the sky 2/3. The next step is if you have a point in the picture that takes on emphasis, such as the tree, it is visually pleasing to place it a little off center. The tree in this example is on the 1/3 line on the right side. Points of emphasis take on more meaning and interest with them off center.

Know the history. What ever your interested in, it is a wise choice to learn some of the history behind it. Photography has a vast history. Learning of the first cameras and how they worked, and even how they were made, is a very interesting to research. When deciding to learn of photography, it is a good idea to learn of past photographers and their own techniques. Several great photographers never even called themselves professionals. Many never got in to it full time, some didn't think they were good enough. The truth is there are many varieties of photography out there and just because one is different over another dowsn't mean that it is not just as good. In most photographs, a person could point out areas of improvment, but photography was meant to make a person think. Photography allows the viewer a glimps into what the photographer was looking at and thinking about at the very moment in time when the picture was taken.

A quick and easy trick to improve your photos quickly is cropping. This sounds easy and it is, for the keen eye. The main thing to look for are tangents. Tangents happen when an object in a photo is very close to an edge without being cut off at all. Either add some space when taking the picture or crop the object part way off, leaving about half or 2/3 of the object still in the picture, this is called bleeding an object off the photo. A cookie cutter rule (so to speak), it to not good to bleed objects on more then one side. Generally it is nice to figureout a set space and crop off one side, then another side gets 1X of your chosen space between an object and the end, and the side gets 2X the space and the last side gets 3X the space (in no particular order). Looking at the image above. the grass bleeds off the bottom, while the tree has a predetermined space between it and the bottom. On the right the tree is 2X the predetermined space, while top and left are 3X and 4X respectivly.

The next important trick you can use to add interest to your photographs is to explore different perspectives. Don't just take a picture standing straight up. test out what a picture would look like, if you were crouched down or if you were standing up on something tall such as a ladder. Think about if the object or a focus point should fill the screen or if it should be more off in the distance. The best advice take can be give, even ahead of this tips and tricks, is to use your own judgment. Look for pictures taken by pros (stock photos are a good example) and see what they were trying to accomplish in taking the pictures. After that if you think (truely think) that they are along the same level of those pictures, then your off to a good solid start. Even after your established in photography and have a good handle on it, do not be afraid to learn, there is always something new to learn!

For futher learning I would suggest, building a box type model, but it must be open all the way around, so just the skeleton on a box. Once this is accomplished you will need some white or a solid color of sheet to lay over the whole thing. Next you need some lights, to shine through the sheets, this is to tone down the lights to prevent hot spots (bright white spots in a photo). Then pick a good angle and take the picture, hidding the camera and yourself for any reflections in the photo. After this is built just work with it get used to hidding yourself from reflections in shinny objects that your photographing. it hard to master but once it is mastered, the pictures are truely breath taking.

There's no 'pain' in oil painting... okay there is.

Whether you know a lot of nothing about painting, it doesn't really matter, painting is a never ending learning process. Sure a person can get by with a fix amount of knowledge on the suject the the truely great ones will always strive to get better. With that being said, lets get started.

I am going to break this down into two catagories first is portraits. What ever you paint it is true that practice makes perfect and this is definitely the case with protrait painting, First, you must chose your model for which you will be studying ever feature, shape and shadow. I sound like a lot but you will be doing this while painting. Once a model is chosen, the overall shape is to be determined, this step is fairly quick, don't bother trying to get this step perfect, because the truth is, even if you do you don't have a whole painting to show for it. After all, you will be painting over most if not all of this layer. This first step is just to act a a general guide.

For your next step I would advise the people without a steady hand to tackle the background next. The reason for this, is because unless the person is bald, and even if the person is bald, it is easier to coverup the background with the person, because the viewer of a painting is looking mainly at the subject and not as much about the background.

Once the general space of the subject is on canvas, you then start with the dark colors of the painting (shadows, darker skin features, hair, etc.). The reason for this is to define the major shapes right away. Lights go on last so don't get to far ahead of yourself. The correct order of operation, is dark, medium, light, and last the highlights. mediums or half tones as they are commonly refered to as, go next to keep the dark shapes established first in check. This is also the time to start desiding where soft and hard edges are in the painting. Starting to bring it all together you can now add the lights, this will give you something to look at and to see stops for improvement. Do not be alarmed if it doesn't look great yet, relax it's not suppose to yet.

When this layer is done, the entire canvas should now be covered with some color of paint. This means no white canvas spots showing. When that is done, you should let it dry. It shouldn't even be tacky when touching it. Now that it is dry you can start adding more and more detail to your piece, make sure that you only paint what you see, for example, don't paint a whole eye if you only see part of one at the angle you are standing. Another thing to remember is to swint your eyes when looking at the subject, this way, if you do not see something that you otherwise see when not swinting, don't paint it. At points like this is is smart ot simplify, because you must keep in mind that you are going for the look of a painting and the look of a photograph.

When you feel you have a good likeness of the subject, it is time to ad the highlights, these are the spots of almost pure white light reflecting, such as on the tip of the nose, on a pair of glasses, and most importantly in a person's eyes. If this is not added to a persons eyes, you will no get the same lively feeling when observing this painting. Any other finishing touches can also be made now.

The other main type of oil painting is landscape. Learning what looks natural in either type of painting is one of the hardest things to do. A slight breeze blowing through the leaves on a tree, or a water sloshing around aimlessly. Those types of techniques take practice, the more time you spend at it the more natural and free flowing things will look.

The first step is to find an interesting scene. If using a photograph for your landscape, you should probably draw the image on your canvas. This will act as a guide when beginning on your painting. When your image is on your canvas, or if your not going to put an image on your canvas, the next step is to start painting, this first period is used to get your shapes close and to get paint on the canvas. Make sure that you start with tmuche darkest darks, painting from dark to light is the easiest, and most effective way to paint anything. Light colors is much more noticeable and take on more emphasis when surrounded by darker colors, and vise versa, this is one of the more important things to keep in the back of your mind when painting, because some instances need more emphasis and others need to be toned down.

Once you have the first layer of paint down, it's time to start to add detail. I like to relate, painting a picture with taking a picture, in that the first layer, you now have the picture captured, but it is the next layer that you focus in on the picture, because the first layer, looks like the picture your painting, but it is out of focus. For the first couple painting, that you do, you should be more worried about getting the shapes down right, rather than the color. The reason for this is that you will get similarities between your piece and the studied piece, much quick through shapes then you will then by getting the exact right color. Now when I say color, I do not mean tone, and shading. This is just as important as shapes, because shapes are made by the surrounding space. Try looking at the surrounding space around a shape sometime and you will see that paintings and even photographs are like puzzles. Many shapes put together make up our world.

Back to the painting. When you think your done with the second part of adding detail, you must then start adding your highlights. When working with anything living, such as animals or people, you have to add a highlight or two to the eyes, otherwise they just look glazed over. 

There are many jobs you can get from painting or drawing, but you must ask yourself, do you want to have a boss. That's perfectly fine if you do. In painting, you could paint what you want and see your pieces for a good chunk of change, but you must rememeber that if you do that, you will need to relate to the people buying your work by changing what you paint. Because if people don't like what you paint you won't sell many pieces. After all people would live with your artwork in their home.

This is after one three hour block of paintng. I took three breaks, each lasting about ten minutes. This is three hours of just painting. I spent another couple of hours prior to this drawing the image on and oil washing the canvas. Oil washing is done, by using linseed oil and your choice of paint color. The color choice should be the main color in the painting. This helps for the first step, so there is much fewer white spots showing through. In this Old Master Painting I desided to use tan colored paint for my oil wash, not because it's the most used color in the piece but because canvas back when the original was painted was a very similar color to tan. I left an area around the subjects hair, to give a slight look at the oil wash technique. The original artist was Leonardo Da Vinci.

This is the piece when completed. I spent about twelve hours on this painting or four, three hour blocks. After each session I allowed a weeks time for the painting to dry. This is not always needed but in this case it was needed. The reason for showing you this process is to show the steps involved in oil painting, and also to add some credibilty to my past painting articles.

This is the piece after one three hour session. Again, I completed the oil wash and drawing of this painting prior to starting on it. In this piece I tried to just get close to the shapes of the subjects face. This is a self portrait. The oil wash color selected was orange to match the background.

This is the piece after two, three hour sessions. These sessions were about a week apart. This week I added some detail to the face, while ignoring the glasses on the subject. Glasses are much easier to paint on after the rest of the painting is complete and dry.

This is the completed painting, after four, three hour sessions. Remember, take breaks when needed, if you are painting for a long period of time. It is good to stop looking at the painting for about ten minutes, this will allow you to come back and take a look at your painting with a fresh eye. This helps a great deal, because it is mcuh easier to see problem areas and gives you a chance to take a rest from the painting. Practicing painting in sessions like the I just described can really help build your ability to paint.

This type of drawing is not as easy as you would tend to believe. The hardest part is the technique for drawing you need to have. You can’t keep your hand rested on the paper while drawing. Because when you get to an area where there are several lines already drawn, your hand that is rested on the paper will smudge your drawing all up. But you can’t spray it with matte finish right after you drawn apart unless you don’t plan on changing it. So I would suggest you start using a stand, holding your paper up by taping it with masking tape. While drawing it would also be a good idea to start getting used to standing, it will keep you more active and into the piece.

Okay, if I haven’t worried you enough yet, let’s get started. Shapes are key when drawing anything. When starting out on a subject, finding similar lengths using your pencil holding it up like in the picture provided. It also works to use your pencil for angle. Holding the pencil up matching the angle, with your arm extended and locked in place, then move the pencil over to the sheet of paper and make a light quick mark. When the mark is transferred to your paper recheck to make sure it is right. This is a lot to take in all at one time, so take some breaks when needed. It is a good thing to never press down too hard, this will produce a shiny surface and that is not what we are going for.

When your techniques are good, you can now start drawing if you haven’t already. Now that the marks are recorded you can sort of connect the dots, so to speak. Making sure that the angles are right periodically is a good habit to get into. I know it is very easy to get into a painting and forget about everything else, but every once in a while I like to step back and just kind of compare the model with my piece.

As the time comes to start shading, I like to use a cross hatching method, similar to the technique use in the picture to the left. If cross-hatching is done in at least three different angles the graphite or charcoal is spread evenly. Cross-hatching will fill in most of the white on the paper so pressing hard when doing this is not needed.

John F. Kennedy was born in Brookline, Massachusetts, his nickname was always “Jack,” and he graduated from Harvard (Patterson, par. 1). Jack’s father was a very rich man, and that, some believe may have had to do with why he was elected for president. At 1:40 PM EST, Anchorman Walter Cronkite broke into “As The World Turns,” to tell the nation that three shots were fired at President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Texas (Doherty, par. 2). The assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy has been debated ever since that horrifying day of November 22nd 1963, in Dallas, Texas. A wonderful painting of JFK is in the white house (Appendix A). Through various sources, many facts and opinions have been gathered. The compilation of information will offer some insight of what really happened and what may be false information. Information from the magic bullet theory to Soviet involvement will be discussed.

According to the Warren Commission, released several months after the assassination, explains in steps what they though happened; “Step one: Lee Harvey Oswald was the only assassin and acted on his own, Step two: He shot from the 6th floor of the Schoolbook Depository Building which was behind the President's limousine at the time of the assassination, Step three: He used the found Italian Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, Step four: Oswald shot police officer Tippit (Schuster, par. 7). The accounts of the eyewitnesses there go against the explanations of the Warren Commission. These witnesses tell that shots were fired from the grassy knoll, not the textbook depository. Witnesses also accounted that a cloud of smoke was seen around the area of the grassy knoll. Along with that, men with rifles were seen in downtown Dallas. The last of the accounts was that witnesses spoke of mysterious looking secret service men in Dealey Plaza (Schuster, par. 8). Among the eyewitnesses, there were first hand accounts by Mrs. Kennedy and Mr. and Mrs. Connally. Mrs. Connally told of hearing a gunshot, when she turned around she said that the President was leaning forward grasping his neck, from the bullet. Very shortly after Mr. Connally explained that he felt an ache in his back, which later turned out to be a gunshot. Moments later Mrs. Kennedy said she thought she heard firecrackers, that she explained as “terrible noises,” and she turned to her husband and saw the fatal head wound that ultimately killed him (Schuster par. 3-4). Other reports were that a second gunman shot Kennedy form the Grassy Knoll (Bradford, par. 1). This evidence explains the reason for why witnesses tell of hearing more than one shot. A second gunman must be the case, especially if Oswald was involved in the assassination, because Oswald didn’t have an automatic rifle. The evidence of the previous witnesses cited also eliminates Oswald from shooting at or killing President Kennedy.

Though evidence found and evidence already stated; Oswald did not commit the crime. According to an FBI agent a tape was recorded of a mystery person explaining to another person and plotting the assassination of the president. The person one the type proclaimed himself to be Lee Harvey Oswald. After listening to this tape over and over, it was found to not be Oswald (Bradford, par. 2). The evidence explaining another mysterious phone call is explained in this quotation: "The CIA advised that on October 1, 1963, an extremely sensitive source had reported that an individual identified himself as Lee Oswald, who contacted the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City inquiring as to any messages. Special Agents of this Bureau, who have conversed with Oswald in Dallas, Texas, have observed photographs of the individual referred to above, and have listened to a recording of his voice. These special agents are of the opinion that the above-referred-to individual was not Lee Harvey Oswald” (Bradford, Oswald pg. par. 1). The previous quote comes from information sent by the FBI to the white house and the Secret Service. This information was sent the day after the assassination. The information also tells of the man on the tape referring to of had a recent meeting with a Soviet official named Valeriy Kostikov. He was known the by the U.S. government as a KGB agent, and after being tipped off by an informant the government finds that Kostikov is in charge of the KGB’s “Department 13” which they find is involved in sabotage and assassinations. With this new information it seemed that Oswald was hired by the Soviet Union to kill President Kennedy. Upon Oswald’s arrest, police compared fragments of Oswald’s voice with the tapes. It was quickly found that Oswald was not the man on those tapes. This however didn’t matter the government decided to keep Oswald in custody, and soon thereafter disposed of the evidence of a cover up. After that the FBI made no other mention of these tape again. Along with the tapes a mysterious call from J. Edger Hoover to Lyndon Johnson, pertaining to the tapes and other information was erased. With the cover up stating to take place, LBJ needed something to take the attention off of it. Therefore he brought up a potential nuclear war with Russia, even after knowing about the impersonation on the tapes. The idea of forty million citizens of the U.S dieing from this possible nuclear war was what LBJ used. After the public got word of the horrifying news, Johnson brought in some of his guys to fill certain government positions to “settle the dust” (Bradford, Oswald pg. par. 6). The other key of the setup was the idea that Oswald was the lone assassin. This could not be the case, because Oswald was not very accurate aiming at all. Along with that the gun found in the snipers nest was not a gun that should have been used in that situation, making it even harder to possibly hit JFK with a bullet, let alone hit him in the head. Possibly the most important step of the cover up was the communist connection told to the people (Bradford, Oswald pg par. 1-9). At the time of the assassination people were scared to death of the communists. To relate the fear of communism then, it is a lot like terrorism now. Back then it was serious to call someone a communist, just as it is now to call someone a terrorist or that someone could be involved in terrorist activities.

The JFK assassination seems to have never been completely solved, not with any amount of evidence anyway. Who ever did pulls the trigger, plot the assassination, aid in the assassination, or have any other involvement in the crime surly deposed of the evident in a very secretive and suspicious way. This s the only way to get away with a crime involving assassinating any world leader let alone the leader of arguably the most developed and powerful nation in the world. One of the possible suspects was Lee Harvey Oswald, and as everyone knows he did somewhat serve the time for the crime. Oswald shouted out, “I’m just a patsy,” when he was questioned by reporters outside the Dallas jail (Morley, par. 20). Lee Oswald, whether he was the lone gunmen, or just the patsy who need to take the fall for the crime someone else committed, is the first person to come to the mind of most people, when asked the life or death question, “who killed John F. Kennedy.” Along with the majority of people thinking that Oswald probably did do the crime, it was also heard that an eyewitness saw Oswald in the Depository window, and later the rifle was found with Oswald’s palm print on it (Bahnsen, par. 6). This is not exactly a smoking gun but it’s close, but could anyone really tell if he pulled the trigger, or if it was really him or a look alike. Oswald is the only person proposed to have killed Kennedy, in the Warren Commission. All the evidence the government seemed to find, from the “magic bullet,” and that it match the gun in the sniper’s nest, and that Oswald got a job at the Texas Schoolbook Depository just weeks before the assassination, all points to Oswald as the lone gunmen (La Fontaine, par. 5). This evidence found and more gathered, when tested, showed that it is highly unlikely, that there had to be more than one gunman (Rahn, par. 27). Was Oswald the patsy or was he just one of the gunmen to kill Kennedy. The evidence found, including the audiotapes, explains that when Oswald yelled out that he was a patsy, he was probably telling the truth. This is a quote of the individuals that may have set Oswald up, “But who did? Who was Oswald set up for? Was it for Allen Dulles, Mrs. Hugh D. Auchincloss, Nelson Rockefeller, Philip C. Johnson, William Henry Chamberlin, Dimitri Von Mohrenschildt, Isaac Don Levine, the Hearst family, George C. McGhee, Howard Hughes, Henry Luce, LBJ, H.L. Hunt and family, White Russians, Igor Cassini and/or his father-in-law C.B. Wrightsman? Or a whole "bunch" of Texas oilmen, alone or together?” (Adamson, par. 7). Whether or not he did kill Kennedy, the Warren Commission setup six investigative panels, to check the background of Oswald (Parenti par. 27). It seems that Oswald was investigated thoroughly enough, that anti-conspiracy activists should feel confident with the outcome.

The second possible suspect is what many have named, “badge man,” this man is the mysterious man on the grassy knoll. Witnesses have explained to have saw a man dressed as a Dallas policeman, and as they heard the shots fired, it seemed that there was a smoke cloud on the grassy knoll. Other witnesses tell of Badge Man hiding behind a fence behind the grassy knoll.

The third suspect is that it could’ve been the Cubans. Along with Castro the Cubans seemed to be threatened or just plain angry with us. The word back then was that Castro ordered Kennedy’s murder because Kennedy tried to have Castro killed. The Cuban Missile couldn’t have helped the relationship between Castro and Kennedy either (Krajicek, par. 3-4).

The KGB may have had a hand in the Kennedy assassination as earlier discussed in this paper. According to former CIA reports, a man claiming to be Oswald said that he was hired by the Soviet Union, and by any officer in the KGB. Along with that the Russians had little contact with Kennedy, but instead his brother during the Cuban Missile Crisis. This could have possibly brought on some hostility.

It has also been rumored that the Mafia may have had a hand in the assassination as well. Many people may not know this, but it has also been rumored that JFK’s dad got the Mafia involved to help him get elected. That is great and all, because people want to be in good with the Mafia. Just so you don’t get killed. After JFK was elected, one of his first orders of business was to clean up the U.S. in terms of crime. This meant that he was going after the Mafia, because the Mafia commits a lot of crime (Tull, par. 5-7) The Mafia doesn’t like to be gone after, especially when they helped JFK be elected. Recently, Peter Jennings and ABC had claimed to solve the assassination. They have concluded that all the shots at president Kennedy were from the back. Along with this information they have questioned the witnesses that say the president’s exit wound was in the neck. That means the shot would have gone through his head, at the altitude of Oswald, which would have killed him, however, at the time he was just holding his neck (Bradford, par. 2) However, it has been found by Joan Mellen, through several years of research that it could not have been the Mafia. This view on the possible conspiracy is in her book, “A Farewell To Justice.” Joan Mellen studied at Temple University, taking at the time she had off for research for this book. She met several times with Jim Garrison, the district attorney of New Orleans. During these visits they rigorously discussed the JFK assassination (Boscia, par. 1-24)

A physic named Jeane Dixon has predicted many things from, shipping accidents to the coming of AIDS. She has also been credited with the successful prediction of the assassination of President Kennedy. The truth that she knew about the JFK assassination, it seems she was right. "As for the 1960 election Mrs. Dixon thinks it will be dominated by labor and won by a Democrat. But he will be assassinated or die in office 'though not necessarily in his first term'" (Adams, par. 2). For the skeptics, it seems that she made several vague guesses. With many of these “guesses” she happened to be right. This seems to be too much of a coincidence that she was right all the time.

Any number of people could have killed Kennedy, a president loved by an entire country, but if it was the government of his own country, and that this was all a big cover up, what does that say about the people in charge of the U.S. We need to start questioning the elected officials. If we have a blind faith in them, something like this may just happen again. A conspiracy of this magnitude could be overwhelmingly shocking to our citizens, including the world. If you can’t trust your country whom can you trust?

Work Cited

Schuster, Ralph. "The John F. Kennedy Assassination Homepage." The Warren Commission. 4 Mar 2006. N/A. 9 Oct 2006 .

Bradford, Rex. "The JFK Assassination." The JFK Assassination. 26 Mar 2001. History Matters. 13 Oct 2006 .

Krajicek, David. "JFK Assassination." Introduction. 2005. Crime Library.com. 13 Oct 2006

Patterson T., James. "Kennedy, John F.." Kennedy, John F.. 2006. Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia. 13 Oct 2006 .

Doherty, Thomas. "Assassination And Funeral Of John F. Kennedy." Assassination And Funeral Of John F. Kennedy. 2005. Museum.tv. 13 Oct 2006 .

Bradford, Clint. "Proof of Oswald's CIA Employment?." TIt's Been Over Forty Years. 11 Sep 2004. Clint Bradford.com. 13 Oct 2006 .

Morley, Jefferson. "Celebrated authors demand that the CIA come clean on JFK assassination." Celebrated authors demand that the CIA come clean on JFK assassination. 17 Dec 2003. Salon.com. 13 Oct 2006 .

La Fontaine, Mary, Ray. "The Fourth Tramp." The Fourth Tramp. Aug 1994. JFK History.com. 13 Oct 2006 .

Rahn A., Kenneth. "Neutron-Activation Analysis and the John F. Kennedy Assassination." Neutron-Activation Analysis and the John F. Kennedy Assassination. Mar 2001. karws.gso.uri.edu. 13 Oct 2006 .

Adamson, C., Bruce. "CIAJFK.com." Timeline Chart. 22 Nov 1995. CIAJFK.com. 13 Oct 2006 .

Bahnsen, Greg. "PA137." The JFK Assassination and Apologetics. May 1992. CMFNOW.com. 13 Oct 2006 .

Tull, Christopher. "Dallas, TX." Top 6 JFK Assassination Conspiracy Theories. 2006. About.com. 13 Oct 2006 .

Parenti, Michael. "From Dirty Truths." From Dirty Truths. 3 Jul 2003. Left Gate Keepers.com. 13 Oct 2006 .

Adams, Cecil. "The Straight Dope." Did psychic Jeane Dixon predict JFK's assassination?. 2 Feb 2000. Cecil's Mailbag. 16 Oct 2006 .

Boscia, Ted . "Book on JFK investigator leads to answers on assassination." Joan Mellen has spent eight years researching Jim Garrison and John F. Kennedy’s death. 17 Nov 2005. Temple Times. 16 Oct 2006 .

Malcolm X and Martin Luther King fought for the same things, however, had very different pasts and had very different lives. The fight for equality was a tough one. The people they were directing their speeches to, didn’t care what there past was like. This may have been because of the time in which they lived, but also may have been the background of the people listening to these speeches and sermons as well.

The fact that these two important men lead very different lives is not a secret. One major difference was that they grew up in to very different families. This is evident in each of their autobiographies. Malcolm explains of having a family with a large amount of kids, along with that his father was killed. On the other hand Martin Luther King Jr. tells that he lived in a smaller family, and felt very loved by both his mother and his father. It was also important that no one killed his father, because MLK jr. may have grown up with different views towards white people.

A major comparison of these two men, were that they both foresaw their future deaths. Malcolm X saw a very violent death in his future, and rightfully so, because his father was murdered. This was probably why he felt that he would be murdered. While Malcolm saw his self being murdered, so did Martin Luther King. He saw violent murder in his life, however, he saw himself in the same light as a modern-day Moses. He realized that death would probably be coming to him, but he wanted desperately to live long enough to help his fellow black people, reach the promise land. This may have been to do with his past as well. His was brought up in a religious home. Therefore he could see the former bible stories somewhat happening during his life. This may not have been as evident to a person that grew up with out a religious influence in their life. When he saw the similarity in his life, MLK embraced it. He felt as though it was his duty to help these people and if need be, to die fighting for equality.

Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X were in some ways, ahead of their time. But it was this time in history where they were able to do the most. Black people back then, need this to wonderful civil rights leaders. Not only did black people need them, but America needed them too. America would not be nearly the same or as great with out these to great leaders in it’s history.

Do you ever ask yourself that? It seems that all we are suppose to accomplish in life is to have lots of money, power, and fame. We are taught this from day one. It just gets kicked into overdrive about the time we are going to graduate, I mean who hasn't who hasn't heard this, "okay Timmy, it's time to go to college so you can get a good job. I'm not saying that money is not important. Because it's very important, just ask anyone. But that should not be the measuring stick of a good life.

We need to stop and enjoy life, because even if we live to be 100, that's not a very long time. It seems like it is. But you need to realize that when life's over, it's over (unless ovf course if you believe in reincarnation). Family is important, a persons happiness is important. Good health is important too. But none of these things fit in that mold of money, power, and fame. Today, it's me, me, me, or me first. If we get caught up in striving for more money, more power, and more fame, we will miss a lot of get things along the way.

How much is enough? We can take anything with us when we die, so why spend so much time trying to get more. Sure that would mean more for our kids, but I don't know about you, but i would rather, have more time with my family than more money. I think there is a lot of people that would give x amount of dollars to have a relative back if only for a day. So when you have the option to spend more time with your family, or to work long for more money, you should think to yourself, wouldn't your kids rather have a littl more time with you rather than a little more money when you ultimately pass on.