Review: Three Oreo Flavors

What makes a good Oreo cookie? The cookie can't be too "crumby," the taste of both the cookie and the cream must be well-balanced without either one overpowering the other, it can't be too sweet, too rich, too creamy, or too dry...does it sound like I'm being overly picky? Does it seem like too much to hope for in a cookie that has been long loved for its simplicity, hailed as "milk's favorite cookie?"

Actually, it isn't. The Oreo company managed to create such a cookie that fit all of the above criteria and still managed to retain its simplicity. It was the Marshmallow Crispy Oreo cookie. It was fantastic, and especially comparing it to two other Oreo flavors really put it into perspective. The packaging was flawless and the taste was excellent--the only thing lacking in this cookie was its ability to hold itself together as I bit down on it. Still, it didn't bother me much because, I mean, all cookies leave crumbs and fall apart eventually.

Presentation/Packaging: Perfectly packaged with an appetizing picture of a giant Oreo cookie dipped in snow-white milk, the presentation of the Oreo cookie is fantastic.

Texture/Firmness: The moment I take the cookie from the perfectly packaged box, it breaks in half. Each time I bite into the cookie, it keeps breaking apart in my fingers until I am holding a mess of crumbs in one hand. It’s too fragile, too “crumby,” and falls apart easily. But then again, pretty much all cookies do that.

As for the taste, each flavor had its own unique sensation.

The Good:

Marshmallow Crispy - The creamy marshmallow sandwiched in-between the two cookie pieces is the perfect balance between the sweet, frosting-like taste and the vanilla flavored cookies. They complement each other perfectly, neither overpowering or being overpowered by the other.

Stars: 3/4

The Bad:

Lemon - The sweetness of the lemon cream explodes in your mouth the minute you bite into the cookie. However,  it’s overly sweet and rich--almost like syrup or medicine, leaving you with a queasy feeling in your stomach.  It reminded me of kids' toothpaste, the sweet, fruity kind that parents buy kids who protest that the paste is too minty. The sweet, syrupy taste of the lemon cream overpowers the taste of the cracker--in comparison, the cracker is tasteless and bland.

Stars: 1/4

The Ugly:

Berry Burst Ice Cream - Even the name is misleading. Ice cream--who doesn't like ice cream? Just thinking about it is appetizing. Even sweeter than the lemon Oreo, this cookie is also dominated by the syrupy, overpowering taste of berry. You can’t taste the cookie, and about halfway through, your mouth and stomach tell you you’ve had enough--you want to stop, feeling queasy.
Stars: 1/4

I had such a nice moment with my Marshmallow Crispy Oreo, I was actually eager to try the other ones, hoping they'd be just as good. I almost groaned in disappointment as soon as I bit into them--like a second movie sequel that just isn't as good as the original, these other two flavors were a complete let-down. Sometimes it really is best to keep things simple. The Marshmallow Crispy Oreo won three stars in that it successfully balanced out the taste of the sweet marshmallow cream with the vanilla flavored cookie with just the right amount of sweetness and just the right degree of hardness in the cookie.

Response to Alan Richman's restaurant review of Gato

Alan Richman is a renown food critic with multiple awards and titles to his name. His review of the restaurant Gato in the GQ magazine was extremely detailed and thorough. He first talks about his initial expectations, how he was doubtful because of his experiences in the past with "celebrity chefs" and because the famous chef who founded Gato, Bobbie Flay, never seemed to be around. He analyzed every aspect of the restaurant--the first impression when walking in, the atmosphere, the service, the pricing, the interior, and every single piece of food he ate during his visit. His descriptions of the food are vividly written and easy to picture: "Slivers of seared duck liver, not foie gras, were mildly accented with black pepper." He displays great, in-depth knowledge of the ingredients in each dish, listing one by one and explaining how it contributed to the overall taste. He certainly isn't afraid to talk about what he didn't like in the meal, and when he does give negative criticism, he gets straight to the point without any sugarcoats, identifying exactly what he didn't like and why. He mentions the feedback on the restaurant he had heard from other people who had eaten there and whether or not he agreed. To top it all off, he threw in bits of information about the chef, the man behind the cooking, and quotes from his interview with him. In each review, Alan Richman makes his credibility and over 20 years of experience in the business clear. This is how a food critic should write.

"Rabbit Seasoning" Review

The story revolves around three characters. Daffy Duck, trying to get through duck season without getting shot, posts signs that say, "rabbit season" everywhere in the woods so that the hunters will know to hunt for rabbits. Elmer Fudd, the little hunter, is trying to shoot a rabbit when Bugs Bunny comes out of the rabbit hole. He cleverly twists the duck’s words, mixing up his pronouns to get the hunter to shoot the duck. Daffy Duck keeps tripping over his words, trying to get the hunter to shoot Bugs Bunny but saying, “shoot me now! Shoot me now!” instead, constantly getting shot in the process. It is one repetitive action throughout the whole short film, but each time he gets shot, something different happens to the arrangement of his break and he keeps having to set it back.

Daffy Duck's exaggerated rage is also sure to give the audience quite a laugh. We can tell that he will never succeed in getting Elmer Fudd to shoot Bugs Bunny, but the things he tries and the effort he puts into it is hilarious when matched with the repeated failures.

While that was all fine and dandy, what about the characters? It's no question that Bugs Bunny's clever ways that get him out of trouble make him a lovable character. But what are children watching this going to learn from him? The sly, clever way to trick people into stepping on their own traps? Taking pleasure in watching another person suffer the consequences of trouble as long as it means they themselves are out of it? They're going to begin enjoying the world of trickery and deceit. And what about Daffy Duck? Is his uncontrollable rage really the way we want to get kids to laugh nowadays? Anger issues?

The cartoon opens with a string of words that say: "If you're looking for fun, you don't need a reason, all you need is a gun, it's rabbit season." This phrase is essentially saying there is no reason, no boundaries when you want to have fun. It promotes aimless, shameless fun. The youth of this generation are going to grow up thinking it's okay to do whatever you want in the name of fun. They should be learning that there are risks to certain activities and even though they might think they're fun at the moment, if they're dangerous or harmful or destructive, it's not worth it.

Movie Reviews: Toy Story 3

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/18/movies/18toy.html
This movie review by A.O. Scott analyzes all aspects of the film Toy Story 3, including the plot originality, the messages it gives to the audience, the script, the visuals, and the fluency between the first, second, and third films in the series. It begins with a reflection on the author's reaction to the opening scene which could be seen in a negative light by some critics--he presents a counterargument regarding the possible claim that the opening scene may seem too cliche or appear too much like a "flashy commercial blockbuster." He then smoothly introduces the central message behind the film, which is supposed to focus on the inexhaustible imagination of children that we can all relate to having at some point in our lives. "Perhaps no series of movies has so brilliantly grasped the emotional logic that bind the innate creativity of children at play to the machinery of mass entertainment," he says. The importance that the film places on imagination allows children to relate directly to the moments they spend sprawled out on the floor of their room with their toys, creating our their own stories and scenarios to act out. It gives adults a wave of nostalgia, reminiscing about the days when innocence allowed them to express their creativity. The author then explores other messages in the movie, such as the value we place on technology and the materialistic mentality that has consumed us. He touches briefly on the movie script and what specific lines that characters say may hint at, and then he goes into the visual aspect of the film, complimenting the cinematography, color, lighting, and angles from a professional point of view. He sums it up cleanly at the end of the review, saying, "In providing sheer moviegoing satisfaction--plot, characters, verbal wit and visual delight, cheap laughs and honest sentiment--Toy Story 3 is wondrously generous and inventive."

Wow. What a review. It's thorough, informative, explanatory, and persuasive. By analyzing all aspects of the film and giving it clean remarks, the reviewer has me all set to spend two hours on watching this movie.

http://nypress.com/bored-game/
I was surprised to find some rather harsh views on some of the same aspects of this movie in Armond White's review of Toy Story 3, which he titled "Bored Game." While A.O. Scott appreciated the message the movie presented about taking a stand against this generation's materialistic ways to preserve childhood innocence and creativity, Mr. White found that "Toy Story 3 is so besotted with brand names and product-placement that it stops being about the innocent pleasures of imagination--the usefulness of toys--and strictly celebrates consumerism." It's interesting to see how the exact same aspect of the same movie can appear so differently to different people. Mr. White also had a problem with the movie's plot, but that was only because he personally didn't like the whole toys-coming-to-life story. He believed it to be cliche, overused, and uninteresting. He thought the romance between Barbie and Ken was a chick-flick digression that made humans appear weak. Overall, he closed the review by saying, "The Toy Story franchise isn't for children and adults, it's for non-thinking children and adults. When a movie is formulaic, it's no longer a toy because it does all the work for you. It's a sap's story."

Mr. White should consider that this movie is directed towards children. He analyzed it in the perspective of a technical, practical adult--no wonder he wasn't grasping the underlying messages about childhood innocence and imagination. He was looking at the surface, the superficial things about the movie and didn't go the extra step into connecting personally with the movie's plot. When reviewing a movie, it's important to keep in mind the audience and who it was created for. Even if you are a professional critic, you must adjust your mindset and perception of the movie to match the audience for whom the movie was created. Only then can you represent the viewpoints of the general public who will see the movie and provide them with an accurate, helpful review.

Where is the justice?

In Egypt, more than 680 people have been sentenced to death following a trial that lasted only a few minutes. These people, the majority of whom are part of a Muslim brotherhood, have been accused of being connected to the killing of a single police officer during a riot last summer. Despite the lack of concrete evidence, at least one member of every extended family has been charged with this crime in the town of Edwa, a move by the Egyptian government that many people are viewing as a public threat to Muslim radicals.

This mass death sentence is the second one given by the same court over the course of merely a month. Of the hundreds sentenced to death in the ruling last month, 37 were confirmed and 492 were transferred to life in prison.

The fact that this is the second time such a massive death sentence has been issued in the space of a single month is unthinkable. At this rate, a violent, bloody civil war is almost inevitable.

While most of the people of Edwa are unspeakably enraged by this unjustified act by the government and the apathy of the police officers who know that many people have been wrongly accused, some residents remain quiet, maintaining that it is the decision of the Egyptian judicial system, which must be trusted. How can it be that in the face of such an inhumane, savage action some people still believe they must trust the government? This shows how brainwashed the people have become under a corrupt government. In the words of the White House, the ruling "defies even the most basic standards of international justice."

But if we really think about it, is our own justice system really that much different?

Yes, it is true that we don't sentence massive amounts of people to death at once without lack of clear evidence and without any efforts to find plausible cases. But our hands aren't exactly squeaky clean either in terms of court rulings. I have had the privilege of sitting through a trial at a local court in which the judge actually fell asleep. The judge would not make an effort to listen carefully to the evidence laid forth by both sides, pay attention to the witness testimonies, or rule on objections from the attorneys of either side. At the end of the trial, the judge took a mere 3 minutes to decide the case and give the ruling.

The sad reality is that that wasn't the only case of a mistrial that we've had in this country. People need to be more aware that our justice system is becoming more corrupt as time goes on. If things continue on like this, will there be a day in the future when justice is no longer even in the courts of the world's nations anymore? We cannot let that happen.

Special Education teachers

One of the challenges that my family has had to face for my brother his whole life was finding teachers that knew how to deal with him. Although there are many special education teachers in the world, each student has a different disability and it's hard to know exactly how to meet their individual needs in every circumstance. I've always had a tremendous amount of respect for the teachers who committed to work with children with special needs. It's hard emotionally, physically, and mentally to walk into a building everyday full of kids who have some sort of restriction on their thinking, their speech, or their movement. It's even harder when you don't know exactly how to help them overcome their difficult circumstances to reach their goals.

I am extremely grateful to the teachers who genuinely try to work for the good of their students despite the hardships they face in a classroom where every student needs an extreme amount of attention but all have different needs. However, it angers me when special education teachers fail to realize the importance of their job and neglect their responsibilities as teachers of kids who really need extra care. If you don't have the patience, gentleness, perseverance, and determination to reach out to these students, you shouldn't become a special education teacher in the first place. It's not meant to be a last resort, "backup job" that you go into if all your other career options fail. It is a real, meaningful, and demanding job that isn't just for anybody.

We need to change our view towards special education teachers. They are too often overlooked, left in the shadows, their work unrecognized. No one really understands how hard it is to go to work every day when your students can't tell you face to face if your teaching is making a difference, if you're helping them in any way. It's a job with very little fruit that takes a very long time to sprout.

Teachers, please do not give up on those students. What they need is love. Teach them with love, believe in them, and little by little, you will see the fruit of your work. We applaud you for the efforts that have gone unnoticed for so long.

In support of Sting's stinging presentation at TED

The TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) conference is an annual, global set of meetings with the slogan, "ideas worth spreading," in which various speakers address a wide range of topics within the research and practice of science and culture. It is a culturally enriching experience for all who speak and watch the conference.

David Brooks wrote an opinion article in the New York Times responding positively to the presentation that rock star singer Sting gave. He mentioned a barren period in the middle of his career when he was unable to write new songs. During this period, all he could recall was his childhood, about poverty and those unspeakably harsh nights when as a child he had to live on a street that led to a shipyard. Ironically, reminiscence over his difficult childhood years were what led him out of this unfruitful stage and revived his creativity.

Brooks was drawn to Sting's presentation because unlike most TED talks, which are all about the future, Sting's was about going back into the past and finding things that seemed bad at the time but turn out to be good in the long run. Brooks found Sting to be "circling back and coming forward." 

He said, "Sting's appearance at TED was a nice reminder of how important it is to ground future vision in historical consciousness. Some of the [other] TED speakers seem hopeful and creative, but painfully and maybe necessarily naiive. Sting's talk was a reminder to go forward with a backward glance, to go one layer down into self and then after self-confrontation, to leap forward out of self. History is filled with revivals, led by people who were reinvigorated for the future by a reckoning with the past."

It wasn't that Sting said all this during his presentation at TED. Brooks was able to draw meaning behind the very fact that Sting was sharing about his past experiences at a conference that was predominately centered around the future of the world. He looked beneath the surface, and shared what he got out of a rock star's presentation that we could all learn from.

Response to an op-ed on common core

Mary E. Burnham recently wrote an op-ed on the atrocities of common core in the education system, particularly in light of the newly updated regulations on the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) in Connecticut. Her main point was that common core standards promotes a "one size fits all" policy towards education that is detrimental to students who need one-on-one attention in certain academic areas. She also found it inappropriate how the new regulations have set in place a new teacher evaluation system that is unnecessarily time-consuming and complex. And finally, she commented on the state tests that all students are required to take, which she feels are diverting parental trust on the education system and placing too much stress on the students.

Her arguments were fair and she gave reasons for her views, but they were presented in a very unprofessional manner. The solutions she offered included eliminating the Common Core State Standards, high-stakes testing, new teacher evaluation system, and asking parents if they want to opt out of the data collecting for state statistics. These solutions are specific, but they are rather weak. She does not clarify what exactly each of these actions will do to better the issue, nor does she explain alternatives to eliminating these policies.

Response to "The Apartheid of Children's Literature"

Christopher Myers, an author and illustrator of children's books, wrote an op-ed article in the New York Times called "The Apartheid of Children's Literature." He wrote so poignantly about the message we send to children of this generation by excluding African American characters from children's books. The characters in these children's stories have been and are continuing to be predominantly centered around white communities and a world where only white people live and succeed. Even decades after the civil rights movement and those hard years in our nation's history where we fought for equality among different races, racism still exists today, and it has evidently even seeped into the way we educate our children.

Myers refers to books as "maps" to children. They learn to navigate the world based on the stories they read. What lessons do we teach kids when books don't even reflect the diversity of our world, which we all want our children to learn to appreciate? How can we expect the world to change, to shake ourselves free from the dust of racial prejudice and pick ourselves up again when we aren't teaching the young generation to appreciate differences, to find beauty in our differences?

Cleverly weaving in references to famous works of children's literature (for example, expressing that there is an elusive villain to this issue and it's up to us to be the James Bond/Black Dynamite to fight against the message we are sending to kids by excluding members of non-white races), Christopher Myers makes a call to action to all writers, authors, parents, teachers, and guardians to join hands in opening the eyes of the younger generation to be more aware of what a diverse world we live in--and to appreciate the beauty within those differences.

Poll shows that the Democrats want Hillary Clinton to run in 2016, Republicans reject Christie

According to a nationwide poll based on telephone interviews with 515 Democrats, 519 Republicans and 550 independents, more than 8 out of 10 Democrats said they wanted to see former First Lady and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to run for president in 2016.

On the Republican side, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is losing support, as 41% said they would rather him not run for presidency and 31% said they would want him to. The remaining percentage were people who did not know enough about the governor to take a side. In the beginning, it was predicted that Governor Christie would be winning the favor of the Republicans. It is clearly not so anymore, based on the results of the poll. No Republican candidate currently has enough support for a presidential run.

The poll was incomplete in many areas because of a lack of knowledge by the public. This is why accurate information is so necessary to have when polling. Uneducated opinions and poll choices can dramatically sway the outcome of the article's subject. As journalists, we must be smart as to where we get our results from--if the people that make up our sample in polls are making their opinions based on true facts that they are aware of. There are so many aspects of a person's decision that must be taken into account. For example, with this poll, it is possible that many people who said that they wanted Clinton to run for office in 2016 did so only because they want to see a woman in office, not because they necessarily agree with her platform. This would make the conclusion that people support Clinton's views less accurate.

Poll says business leaders believe that knowledge trumps college pedigree

A telephone survey with 623 U.S. business leaders asked them to rank the level of importance of four different factors companies look for when hiring. These four categories were: the amount of knowledge the candidate has in the field, the candidate's applied skills in the field, the candidate's college or university major, and where the candidate received his or her college degree. The sample for the business leader study was nationally representative of businesses in the United States.

The survey was then conducted on average American adults, and it was discovered that the American adult population generally agrees with the opinions of business leaders in terms of the importance of knowledge and applied skills in the field. About eight in 10 U.S. adults believed that knowledge and applied skills in the field were very important factors to consider when they looked for qualifications to hire a candidate.

The average American, however, rates the candidate's college major and where the candidate received his or her degree as higher in importance than business leaders do. Nearly half of U.S. adults surveyed said that a candidate's college or university major is very important to hiring managers, and 30% said that where the candidate received his or her college degree is very important.

The conclusions drawn from the findings of this survey are that the business leaders claim that where a person gets a college degree and what their major is isn't as important as their level of skill and knowledge in a particular field when it comes to hiring for jobs. Nowadays, colleges are becoming more and more competitive and high school students are having to work harder and harder to be the applicant that these colleges are looking to accept. The workplace is as ruthless as ever, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to find a suitable job. Applicants to colleges and applicants to jobs both need qualifications, and many people these days work hard at making their application or resume the perfect, cookie-cutter shaped application that these people are looking for. However, they fail to realize the importance of experience. It is now experience that will distinguish you from other candidates for a college or a job. The experience you have will be what marks you as a potentially successful candidate.

Response to "Gender diversity on Sunday news shows"

There was an article in the Washington Post about gender diversity on Sunday news shows. Two dozen women's organizations had collaborated to write a letter to Media Matters for America explaining how they believed it was unfair that women were not being asked to speak on important issues that pertain directly to their gender. "There are qualified women to speak on issues affecting all Americans, including national security, economic growth, climate change, education and many others," the article said.

The article offered statistical information such as the fact that women made up a mere 17 percent of Congress in 2008, a percentage which increased only very slightly in 2013, when women made up 18.3 percent of Congress. For the past decade or so, the percentage of women reporters have been at a deadlock of 38 percent.

The choices of which news stories to cover and which to exclude from daily publications have bias in and of themselves. For example, there are some stories that only women would think to publish, like stories advocating equal pay for women in the workplace, or women's health, or family counseling. This is why it is necessary to have women in the newsrooms. While I don't agree with replacing perfectly adequate males in some professions with women just for the sake of creating more diversity, I do think it necessary to have the voice of women heard loud enough for the world to understand that there are two sides to each story--from the men's perspective and the women's. I think the solution is not to get rid of the already existing spots occupied by males, but rather to create more room for the women to freely utilize their capabilities in each profession.

Stereotypes

Stereotypes are everywhere in the world. Being an Asian teenager and attending one of the most prestigious high schools in the country, I have been labeled with some of these stereotypes. One of the most common ones is that all Asians are smart. While this may seem like a flattering and admirable stereotype, the way it is being used by teens puts a very negative label on the way Asians are viewed in the world today.

It is true that Asians have historically had revolutionary ideas about science, society, education, technology, and just life in general that have contributed significantly to their uniquely advanced ways of life. But summing all of that up with a generalization such as "all Asians are smart" means that all of the efforts and work of these Asian people are lost in the shadows. Simply stating race and genetics as the reason for Asian advancement hides the fact that Asian people have actually worked very hard and pondered very deeply to get to their level of sophisticated thinking and development.

In America, where many Asian immigrants now populate schools and learn among actual American children, many Asian students have worked their way up to the top academic levels in schools. Many people use the stereotype that all Asians are smart as an explanation for this. But these Asian children didn't inherit success from their genes--nobody is born successful. They achieved because they studied, worked hard, and learned to think deeply. Generalizing every Asian student's success with the stereotype that all Asians are just naturally smart makes it seem like they never have to work for anything, that they spin out good grades and success stories from their genetic code.

Like anyone else in the world, Asians have achieved success through hard work and ambition. And though Asians may all have a natural ambition to do whatever it takes to excel and strive for the best, only the ones who are willing to put in the work actually get there. We don't have a secret ingredient in our DNA that ensures natural success or intelligence. Like every other person on the planet, we must be willing to work hard in order to achieve success.

Asian people are not successful because they are Asian. The ones that are intelligent and successful are so because they have worked for it.

Press Freedoms

In my journalism class we debated issues related to press freedoms. The most complicated and difficult issue was obscenity, because while there's a fine line between what is obscure and what isn't, children should really be kept away from things that are vulgar or violent or inappropriate until they are of age. But it's also a matter of how the government can possibly censor every inappropriate thing from the kids.

This difficult issue on obscenity caused me to change my mind the most--at first I agreed that the media should be allowed to decide what is obscene and what is acceptable, but now I think that government interference is necessary to regulate what sort of information is being exposed to children on a daily basis. Children aren't watched all the time--it's impossible to control every little thing they see on television. There are certain issues that they shouldn't be exposed to until they are older. But at the same time, is it the government's responsibility, or is it the parents'?

Obscenity is the most open issue related to press freedoms, and prior restraint is the most settled, closed debate for me. I believe that the government should not be allowed censorship except for in national security issues, because once they are given control of that, the nature of the government would cause it to abuse their right to censor and start censoring every little thing not only for the safety of the public but for their own reputation. They will find loopholes, excuses, reasons to censor things people say that make them look bad.

Breaking down the walls

In the New York Times Magazine, there was a long feature on Jeannette Walls, the author of a few novels that are based on her own personal experiences in her nomadic childhood with her alcoholic father, bipolar mother, and unstable family life. The feature is entitled, "How Jeannette Walls Spun Good Stories Out of Bad Memories," and rightly so, because Jeannette Walls has allowed these experiences to build up her character and morals when they would have torn most people to pieces.

The Walls family changed their address 27 times in a single year and there was hardly time to settle down and spend time with each other. They didn't appreciate one another nor have the ability or time to care about one another. Although it did make her more independent as she grew up, Walls resolved to never have children of her own.

Her relationship with her mother never became as close as the average family's mother-daughter relationship is, but some wounds did heal and Walls does still feel an obligation to care about and protect her. Walls claims she has learned to accept things she cannot change and learn to adapt to the circumstances. This is what allowed her to view her past as something that could shape her and not hold her back. Sure, it sounds easy. But in reality this is a lesson that takes a lifetime to fully embrace.

It's not that easy to let go of a pain from the past. It remains a stain upon our hearts. They say time heals all wounds, but even a slight trigger can take us back to a memory that was particularly painful for us, and even after decades, we still prefer not to think about it because there's still that slight uncomfortable inner pinch.

It really is all about attitude. Walls had optimism when most people in her circumstances wouldn't have had any. She found ways to take matters into her own hands and refuse to give into self-pity. She is a tigress on the inside, a strong, independent, optimistic, bright woman who experienced injustice but chose to let it build her character.

Marilaine, the girl who just wanted an education

I can't imagine a 13-year-old in the 21st century being denied the right to an education and forced into child labor. The New York Times Magazine did a feature on Marilaine, a 13-year-old Haitian girl with an impoverished family and separated parents, who walked all the way to her father's house to ask for money to go to school only to be forced into child labor. Although Marilaine did get more food and was allowed to attend a free afternoon school, her arms and legs were covered with scars from beatings and she was never allowed to see her parents.

It wasn't until an aid group called the Restavek Freedom Foundation stepped in that Marilaine was able to escape and take refuge in a safe house for child laborers. From there she was able to reunite with her family members and relatives, who were all shocked to see her alive but didn't display any sort of relief or gladness. She was just one more mouth to feed if she were to return and stay with them. Marilaine just wanted to return to the safe house and live there so she could get a good education.

The average child in America grumbles about school, complaining about not feeling like doing work and jumping for joy when vacation rolls around. We often complain when we don't feel like a topic is of much use to us, asking, "why do we even need to know this?" But kids like Marilaine have a real hunger for knowledge and they want an education because they want to simply learn. We forget what a blessing it is that we can acquire knowledge about the world around us, even when that knowledge won't be applied on a daily basis in our lives. At least we can fill our brains with facts that make us more knowledgeable people; at least we can know for the sake of knowing.

Every child has a right to education. Children every day are being denied education and sometimes even denied a home and a family because their parents or relatives are too poor to support or feed them. Human trafficking is often linked to poverty. Some families have to sell their children away because they can't support them. As is suggested at the end of this feature article, a solution to this can be to improve birth control methods in these countries so that families can limit the number of children they have. Another solution can be to make education free so that paying a tuition wouldn't be a burden to these families.