Unacceptable Apologies

At times it is difficult to apologize and take ownership for one’s personal wrongdoings, but what happens if the government neglects ownership for its own misconducts? Layli Long Soldiers’ poem, “WHEREAS” (2017), explores this tension in an Apology written by the U.S. Government to Native Americans. In the story, the main character encounters a man who is content with the apology letter. However, when the main character does not share her own thoughts with the man, she later feels regretful. This sense of regret is captured through metaphor.

In the poem, Soldier says “whereas since the moment had passed I accept what’s done and the knife of my conscience pierces with bone-clean self-honesty;” (Soldier 1).

The phrase, “the moment,” references the author’s encounter with the “blue-eyed man” at the beginning of the poem (Soldier 1). Her conversation with the man made her feel as if she had missed an opportunity to enlighten him on the government’s lack of ownership in their apology. This idea is referenced through how she “accept[ed] what [was] done” (Soldier 1). During her conversation with the man, she did not voice her dissatisfaction with the vagueness of the Apology. She never mentioned her discontent with the fact that the Apology did not take responsibility for the genocide they committed against the Native Americans. This idea is represented through the metaphor of the knife piercing her conscience. She feels a pain in her conscience because she did not speak out against the Apology. Her conscience tells her what is right from wrong and it is experiencing a piercing pain since she knows it is wrong to stay silent. The knife piercing her conscience is like the moral guilt she feels from staying silent. Her conscience forces her to accept her obligation to voice her dissatisfaction with the Apology in the future.

The Apology neglects the inclusion of the term “genocide,” but uses other words to describe the atrocities made against Native Americans. In the Apology, it refuses to address genocide by saying that:

“[U.S. citizens apologize] for the many instances of violence, maltreatment, and neglect inflicted on Native peoples” (Native American Apology Resolution 5).

The use of the words “violence” and “maltreatment” are a replacement for the term genocide. The Apology does not take ownership for genocide and, instead, would rather use language that is a misrepresentation of the murders that were committed.


Works Cited

Soldier, Layli Long. “From WHEREAS by Layli Long Soldier.” Poetry Foundation, Poetry           Foundation, www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/poems/91697/from-whereas.

United States , Congress. “Text – S.J.Res.14 – Native American Apology Resolution.”Congress.gov, 6 Aug. 2009, www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/14/text.

Diminished Responsibility

It was the intent of the United States “To acknowledge [the] long history of official depredations and ill-conceived policies by the Federal Government regarding Indian tribes and offer an apology to all Native Peoples on behalf of the United States” (U.S Senate,1). Though it is true that acknowledgment is the first step in the recovering process, a simple ‘recognition’ of the wrongdoings of the United States regarding the treatment of Native Americans, is not enough. In order to actually reconcile the relationship between the United States and its Native Peoples, it is going to take more than a national, half-hearted apology. This is urged in Layli Long Soldier’s poem “WHEREAS”, as this Native American poet use juxtaposition to analyze the language used in the national “Joint Resolution” address.  



Feminist and Civil Rights Activist, Audre Lorde noted that “It is the responsibility of the oppressed to teach the oppressors their mistakes”(Lorde, 1). And that is exactly the burden Layli Long Soldier carries when she uses her poem to challenge the language used in this national address. The government of the United States apologized “for the many instances of violence, maltreatment, and neglect inflicted on Native Peoples by citizens of the United States” “whereas Native Peoples and non-Native settlers engaged in numerous armed conflicts” (U.S Senate 2-3). Soldier’s direct response to this statement was the reflection that she “could’ve but didn’t broach the subject of ‘genocide’, the absence of this term from the Apology and its rephrasing as “conflict” for example”(Soldier 16-17).  


It is evident, that even within this national address, the United States continues to diminish the history of Native Peoples here in America. Solider emphasizes that by using the term ‘conflict’, opposed to genocide is a euphemism   The language used within this piece fails to convey the severity. Soldier challenges this address by stating that the apology is simply not enough recognition. In return, she opposed the concept of a formal apology and “whereas” proposed a more authentic way of addressing the history of the U.S and its Native Peoples, such as “setting a table” and eating and conversing genuinely without formalities.  


Soldier uses this piece to highlight the notion that the United States government has to put forth a greater effort to acknowledge their role in the genocide of Native Americans. With a lack of a genuine, humane approach to this history, nothing will be resolved.


Works Cited:

Lorde, Audre. “Age, Race, Class and Sex: Women Redefining Difference”. April 1980  

Soldier, Layli Long. “WHEREAS.” January 2017. 

United States , Congress. “Text – S.J.Res.14 – Native American Apology Resolution.”Congress.gov, 6 Aug. 2009, www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/14/text. 







A Culture Conditioned to Subordination


If a random American was asked to describe Native American society, expected responses may range from an appreciation of elaborate cultural practices to references of incredible injustices inflicted upon these peoples throughout history. Regardless, it is becoming evident that the way Native Americans imagine themselves versus how generations stemming from European settlers do is different. In Layli Long Soldier’s 2017 collection of poems entitled “Whereas,” she responds to the “Native American Apology Resolution” given through a 2009 joint resolution by the U.S. government where she details the internal feelings of Natives, evaluating the contrast between ideals of these groups.

Introducing this contrast and addressing how the minds of Native Americans are conditioned to believe in their inferiority and a gentler version of history, Long Soldier begins by using a simile to describe how, “like a bird darting from an oncoming semi [her] mind races to the Apology’s assertion / ‘While the establishment of permanent European settlements in North America did stir conflict / with nearby Indian tribes, peaceful and mutually beneficial interactions also took place’” (Long Soldier 9-11). This device works in conjunction with her later critique of the government’s attempt to sugar-coat past events, with “the subject of ‘genocide’ the absence of this term from the / Apology and its rephrasing as ‘conflict’” (Long Soldier 16-17), as above. The comparison of her mind to a fragile bird in its escape from an imposing semi-trailer truck is a blunt, harsh form of imagery, where a beautiful creature is at the disposal of some technological monster. Here, the Native speaker and her people are automatically adopting the bird’s persona, while seemingly implying the white settlers and current government act like merciless semis. She creates this sense of hostility (similar to actions against Natives) by pairing an animal that represents innocence with a looming contraption. Furthermore, she directly responds to the Resolution, forcing the conversation onto the implications she claims the Resolution alters.


By using the simile to create a divergent coupling of a bird to a truck, she also highlights the contrast between the government’s soft explanation/apology for what happened to Indians versus actual mass casualties that occurred. Additionally, she goes on to describe how the overall word choice can disguise underlying truths. By contradicting the peaceful claims of the U.S. to Native American reality, the poet stresses the need to recognize different perspectives, no matter how painful, while pinpointing flaws in connections between Native American perspectives and the acknowledgement of the government that controls them.


Work Cited

Long Soldier, Layli. “Whereas.” Poetry Foundation, Poetry Foundation, January 2017,

The federal government’s last word

“An apology is a good way to have the last word” (unknown). Apologizing is often so hard even on a small scale because they entail self reflection, acceptance and regret which are all difficult things to come to terms with. On a very large scale, a nationwide scale apologies are quite admirable. In 2009, the “Native American Apology Resolution” was signed by Barack Obama. The resolution sought to “offer an apology to all Native Peoples on behalf of the United States” (1). As a big step forward for all the wrong doings The United States government and Americans have committed against Native Americans this resolution is seen in a positive light. However, this resolution was met with negative (and rightfully so) reactions, one of which is Long Soldier poem “from WHEREAS” (2017). Written years after the resolution Long Soldier expressed her dissatisfaction and contemn of the resolution.

Towards the end of the poem Long Soldier’s illustrates her anger through a metaphor which compares a tablecloth and the word “whereas”. “Whereas sets the table. The cloth.” (2) Long Soldier writes, introducing the metaphor. This comparison highlights not only Long Soldiers overall negative reaction to the Resolution but even worse, her belief  that the resolution was only a  cover up for the still unresolved issues between Native Nations and the American populace.

A table cloth can be found in most households and is used on a daily basis, making this metaphor more powerful because of its relatability. The purpose of a table cloth is to cover the table, stains and messes, make things look nice and provide a surface to din on. All these purposes of a tablecloth parallel the the overarching deception that Apology Resolution creates. Despite attempting to apologize Long Soldier makes it clear that like a tablecloth, it is impossible to fix a past issue or stain. The tablecloth or “whereas” cannot possible cover up or make up for the mass murder genocides of Native Nations, forced assimilation, disrespect or failure to stand by treaties that (2-3) the federal government agreed to. It is also impossible for the Apology to expect tensions between Natives and Westerners to disappear in hopes of creating a new foundation to build a positive relationship off of like a tablecloth creates a new surfaces every night.

In the resolution the word “whereas” is used in the beginning of each statement signifying the next part of the apology. The amount of times it is written digs the American Federal government further into a hole of ingenuine apologies. This magnifies the disrespect that this apologies holds towards Native Americans. Long Soldiers closes her poem by saying “Whereas… just enough to eat” (2). Again connecting “whereas” to a table setting the word and apology allows the federal government to maintain control, continuing to disrespect Native people. The federal government had to have the last word.


Works cited:

Long Soldier, Layli. “from WHEREAS”, 2017.

United States , Congress. “Text – S.J.Res.14 – Native American Apology Resolution.”Congress.gov, 6 Aug. 2009, www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/14/text.


BP 2

Inauthentic Formality

Native Americans were the first people to live in the United States. Unlike many citizens, who trace themselves to immigrants, Native Americans have a direct claim to US land. It is tragic, then, that Native American’s have been oppressed and treated as outsiders for much of America’s history. Layli Long Soldier’s 2017 poem, “WHEREAS” is a commentary on the Senate’s 2009 Resolution of Apology to Native Peoples of the United States.

GIPHY Native AmericansIn the last stanza of her last page, Soldier personifies “Whereas” as a person who invites the speaker to sit down and talk at a dinner table. Through this personification, Soldier’s poem suggests that the Apology attempted to fix, but did not successfully amend, the relationship between Native Americans and the Federal Government.

The speaker of the poem personifies Whereas and compares it to a dinner host who has power and control. She states, “Whereas calls me to the table because Whereas precedes and invites… Under pressure of formalities, I fidget I shake my legs” (59-61). At first, Whereas is inviting. This suggests that the speaker originally felt welcomed by the Senate’s Apology. However, “Whereas precedes,” and in the invitation to sit, Whereas still holds the upper hand. There is no equality, because Whereas (aka the Government/its apology) holds the power in the relationship.

Then, Whereas becomes full of “formalities” that make the speaker uncomfortable. The speaker “fidget[s]” and “shake[s].” Her discomfort suggests that Whereas, personifying the Apology, is too regimented to be genuine. It lacks a sincerity and only wants to better its “formal” image. This demonstrates that the Senate, in writing the apology, was less concerned with righting its wrongs and more concerned with protecting its image.
GIPHY Uncomfortable DInnerThe speaker goes on to challenge the Apology. She says, “Whereas, I have learned to exist and exist without your formality, saltshakers, plates, cloth” (Soldier 63). Here, by stating that she has discovered how to “exist without [Whereas’s] formality,” the speaker concludes that she does not want to be given just any formal apology. She does not want to receive a letter; she wants something authentic. Something that will ease the discomfort and tension in her conversations with others about Native American life. Something that will put Native Americans on equal footing with other Americans. Something that may not be documented in the Senate’s sessions but will change the culture.

This poem shows the challenges still faced by Native Americans who feel ostracized and uncomfortable with the way other Americans view their history and culture. The poem challenges people to not let a formal Apology be the end of the conversation. “Whereas” calls on readers to learn about Native American culture and appreciate it—to see it as something unique and valuable, not as something to label “different.”
Works Cited
Soldier, Layli Long. “WHEREAS.” January 2017.

Denial of Knowledge as Power

Not learning is resistance. Beverly Tatum, in “The Complexity of Identity: ‘Who Am I?’”, presents Herbert Kohl’s not-learning as the “reject[ing] [of] their world” (4). The “their” in this context are dominate figures. The Others, or as Tatum would suggest the subordinated, tosses off the dominates attire—regardless of the risk— and decides to operate within their own worlds.

Though extremely dangerous—as it may incite violence— some members of imagined subaltern groups find it necessary to resist in this way. Understanding that refusal to submit, or “to agree to learn from a stranger who does not respect your integrity” may result in an irrevocable “loss of self” (4). And writing has been a major mode of “reject[ing] their world.”

Layli Long Soldier, in “Whereas” (2017), participates in resistive writing. Layli directly challenges u.s colonialism, “apologies”, whiteness, and stereotypes of Indigenous People. She calls it “genocide”, not “conflict” (1). And is unsatisfied with the stealthy u.s.


Within “Whereas”, the speaker demonstrates their dissatisfaction with the “Native American Apology Resolution” by personifying whereas as a white-american, and by stripping whereas from its original amicable connotation. Through the repetition of “Whereas,” the speaker establishes its racial background. Because Long Soldier repeats “Whereas” throughout her poem, mocking the Apology Resolution written by the u.s government (a totem of whiteness), the race of “Whereas” is birthed because of this explicit intertextuality.

Therefore, the speakers claim that “Whereas asks and since Whereas rarely asks, I am moved to respond” is understood as a white individuals attempt at parsing through the experiences of Indigenous Persons (2). This quote too underscores the lack of attention, traditionally, given to Indigenous Communities. The juxtaposition of “rarely asks” with “asks” highlights: 1) historically, “Whereas” may have been interested in ASPECTS of Indigenous People’s lives, but not their entirety 2) now, “Whereas” has a newly discovered interest in Native People’s way-of-being. Their newly discovered ethnocentric interest “moves” the speaker to respond to absurd questions. Though they may not fully desire to. Thus, the narrator’s level of discomfort is too signaled by this quote.

However, it is earlier in the poem where the speaker’s discomfort, or dissatisfaction, is revealed. “Whereas the curled hand I raised to my mouth was a sign of indecision” this reaction arises post-hearing of a resolution (1). The speaker reveals their “indecision,” or inability to grapple with the backhanded apology. Thus, they reason to “stand up excusing myself I leave them” (1). Nonetheless, this opening is littered with visceral responses because of the “resolutions” unsettling nature.

Maybe the u.s tried to be civil and reinstate peace. Maybe they tried to wash their blood-stained hands. But, as evident by Layli’s piece, it was in vain. Indigenous Communities were still left harmed: their histories became coincided with u.s’s failed attempt at an apology.

Works Cited:

Long Soldier, Layli. “WHEREAS,” 2017.

Tatum, Beverly D. “The Complexity of Identity: ‘Who Am I?’” , 2015.


A Green Goddess of Light

In the 19th Century, it was a widespread belief that the word “liberty” suggested violence and revolution (“The French connection”). However, the man who proposed that the Statue of Liberty should be built and given to The United States as a gift from France, had a contrasting idea of what liberty truly meant. Édouard de Laboulaye believed that this monument should “not be seen as leading an uprising, but rather as lighting the way, peacefully and lawfully,” hence giving it the name of Liberty Enlightening the World (“The French connection”).


The sentiments of de Laboulaye, along with ideas about America as a nation, were effectively portrayed by Emma Lazarus. She was an American poet born in New York City, and is most famously known for her famous poem entitled The New Colossus. In her sonnet, Emma Lazarus uses a wide range of rhetorical techniques to convince her audience that America is the new land of the free, and offers everyone a chance to succeed (“A short analysis of Emma Lazarus”). The most significant rhetorical device used in the poem is a metaphor, which is found towards the beginning of the poem when Lazarus writes, “A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame/ Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name/ Mother of Exiles” (“A short analysis of Emma Lazarus”). Before analyzing and discussing the effectiveness of this powerful metaphor, it is necessary to regard the host of divergent literary techniques that Lazarus employs throughout her piece.

Among commencement of the poem, it is clear that the tone in which this poem is written serves as a delivery-method for multiple devices. The tone of this poem is powerful and accusing. It is powerful in that there are words with connotations of strength and advantage being employed throughout the sonnet such as “brazen,” “conquering,” “mighty,” and “command.” Moreover, in the second half of the poem, the tone shifts to one of an accusatory nature. With the authoritative line, “Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp,” Lazarus is essentially telling ancient lands of Europe that they can “keep” their history, because here in America, there will be no “homeless,” “tired,” or “poor” (“A short analysis of Emma Lazarus”).

Looking back at the previously-mentioned metaphor, it is clear that it serves as the pillar of this poem. In the comparison, the bright light that the torch produces is juxtaposed with the power and light of lightning. With the words, “a mighty woman with a torch,” Lady Liberty is being personified, and the name “Mother of Exiles” portrays that the statue will be a mother-like figure (“A short analysis of Emma Lazarus”). The parallel between lightning and a torch invokes the symbol of light in the poem, one which inspires hope and a bright future.


Works Cited

“A Short Analysis of Emma Lazarus’ ‘The New Colossus’.” Interesting Literature, 3 Feb. 2017, www.interestingliterature.com/2016/08/30/a-short-analysis-of-emma-lazarus-the-new-colossus/.

“The French Connection.” National Parks Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 8AD,   www.nps.gov/stli/learn/historyculture/the-french-connection.htm.


“Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame, With conquering limbs astride from land to land…”

The Statue of Liberty is something different – even if it wasn’t meant to be. That’s the power of poetry.

Greek Reporter

Colossus of Rhodes & The Statue of Liberty


In her poem, “The New Colossus” Emma Lazarus marks the Statue of Liberty as the “Mother of Exiles.” This is a vastly different stance than the old Colossus of Rhodes which Lazarus describes as a conqueror. Rhodes with the help of Egypt prevented a siege in 304 BC and with the enemy gone, Rhodes used the money from selling the leftover equipment to build the tallest statue in the ancient world.

Alternatively, Lazarus personifies the Statue of Liberty as mother embracing and welcoming the people of the world into her home, our country. She is just as mighty as her predecessor, but making her a mother makes the Statue inherently more reachable, more welcoming, to newcomers than passing beneath a protecting sun-god. By personifying the Statue of Liberty, Lazarus has forever given kind voice for exiles and immigrants and refugees to heed as they journey to this foreign land. She holds aloft her torch of “imprisoned lightning” flame. Though she stands unmoving and with silent lips, she has the power to imprison lightning in her work to light the way for her children to come to their new home. Even in the poem itself, she takes control of the narrative with enjambment – she doesn’t let the end of a line end her either her description or her speech.

The Statue of Liberty was constructed as a monument to Republicanism, with nothing to do with immigration whatsoever. Emma Lazarus made the decision to immortalize the statue as a mother to all who cross our borders. This being written right after the signing of the Chinese Exclusion Act which explicitly barred a specific ethnic group from entering the United States for the first time in its history. Emma Lazarus wrote about the America we should be, even if it’s not exactly who are just yet.

Blog Prompt #1

Works Cited

Pliny the ElderNatural History xxxiv.18.

Auster, Paul (2005), “NYC = USA”, Collected Prose: Autobiographical Writings, True Stories, Critical Essays, Prefaces, and Collaborations with Artists, Picador, p. 508, ISBN 0-312-42468-X.

America – the land of equal opportunity?


In a land stolen from its’ natives, built on the backs of enslaved Africans, for the advancement of the European colonizers’, all should be welcomed here in this land of the ‘free’, right? No? Not quite? Well that’s what America promises to the millions of immigrants who voyage to the United States in search of opportunity. Socially and politically fed up with the aspects of their native countries, immigrants are in for a rude awakening as they enter the ‘golden gates’ of America. But make no worries, they’ve been subliminally warned, prepped by Emma Lazarus’ Petrarchan sonnet, The New Colossus.  


Well not technically. That introduction there was kind of a stretch – but one made based on the contemporary relevance of Lazarus’ sonnet. I believe that the actual meaning of Lazarus’ sonnet is up for debate and given the actual precarious relationship between the United States and the racially, culturally, and ethnically divergent, one could interpret the actual meaning of Lazarus’ piece. Lazarus’ piece is not only one of its time, but apart of our time today as well.  



“Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore, Send these, the homeless, the tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” (lines 10-14). Originally, these lines were interpreted to be accepting of immigrants from all specs of life – varying in cultures, ethnicities, race and socioeconomic levels. America was portrayed as a nation that indiscriminately welcomed every hard working being into this ‘glorious’ place. Lazarus symbolized the entrance into the U.S as a ‘golden door’, as if life in America for ALL is anywhere close to being heaven-like. Completely ignoring the fatal relationships between Europeans and ‘others’ in America. This sonnet depicting hope for all immigrants in America has caused controversy in today’s time, given the presidency of Donald Trump and his blatant disapproval and disregard of immigrants. 




The contemporary recontextualization of this piece is that America is indeed not a place for ALL immigrants. Since the beginning of America as a nation, European colonists have exploited people with cultural and ethnic differences which were deemed inferior for they didn’t coincide with theirs. From the slaughtering of America natives  to the enslavement of Africans off of Africa’s Western Coast, America has a history of abusing the people they’ve viewed as “different”. The realization that America is indeed not a place welcoming of immigrants as the Statue of Liberty represents can be seen in Donald Trump’s recent comments on immigrants, in addition to his congressional proposal to construct an $18 billion dollar border wall to keep all Mexicans from obtaining illegal entrance into the U.S.    





 When the leader of the free world was asked on his stance on providing asylum to immigrants here in America, from Haiti, El Salvador, and African countries, he responded: “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” Trump said, according to these people, referring to countries mentioned by the lawmakers. With a preference for ‘people from Norway’, it is quite obvious that all immigrants aren’t welcomed here in America. Following Trump’s remarks, contemporary America has resurfaced and recontextualized Emma Lazarus’ The New Colossus to simply interpret who truly is welcomed and accepted into this country, and who is not.




Lazarus, Emma. “The New Colossus.” Historic American Documents. Lit2Go Edition. 1883. Web. <http://etc.usf.edu/lit2go/133/historic-american-documents/4959/the-new-colossus/>. February 05, 2018.

“Trump derides protections for immigrants from ‘shithole’ countries”: The Washington Post: Democracy Dies in Darkness, 2018. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-attacks-protections-for-immigrants-from-shithole-countries-in-oval-office-meeting/2018/01/11/bfc0725c-f711-11e7-91af-31ac729add94_story.html?utm_term=.cdbe8a4d44d6

“Trump asks for $33B for border, including $18B for wall”. CNN: Politics. 2018. https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/05/politics/border-security-billions-trump-wall/index.html




A Dangerously Beautiful Phenomenon

A critical rule instructed to children who are learning to swim is to never go in a pool when you can see lightning or hear thunder. This is often coupled with an order to not stand under a tree either. Why? Because typically lightning is responsible for around 49 deaths annually (Lam). Lightning is powerful, dangerous, charged, aweing, beautiful, deadly. So, why would a phenomenon that can inflict such damage and signify the onset of a storm be used in a literary context that seemingly signifies the opposite?

That context in reference happens to be the words of Emma Lazarus in her poem “The New Colossus” transcribed on the Statue of Liberty. Throughout history, the U.S. stood as a sign of hope for millions of immigrants who wished to build a better life. Through her writing, Lazarus paints Lady Liberty as a symbol of that hope, but also as “A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame / Is the imprisoned lightning . . .” (4-5), an almost perplexing oxymoron, if you will. Yet, if America and the Statue offer a chance to begin again, why would the term “imprison” be utilized at all, even if it is in reference to this threatening energy? Some may argue we want to control this powerful lightning if a side-effect is the fear it inflicts in so many people, if lightning was only seen as a catastrophic event.

In this instance, Lazarus is relying on the people’s belief that in being so mighty, in having the potential to harm, lightning is magnificent, it lights up the darkness. She is using an unmentioned comparison: the lightning and torch to symbolize a combination of immigrants themselves, their journey to America, and the promise of new life they will discover. Lightning can be both disastrous and dazzling, similar to how the trip across the Atlantic can be devastating, despite an ultimate goal of an improved life.

Ultimately, if we can capture the lightning, the associated negative connotations, we can transform them into something beautiful, imagining them as signs of strength. The imprisonment of the lightning in the torch can serve as a housing for the flame. The people coming to America are the flames, beaming with bright light. This country is the torch, their home, their starting foundation. Lazarus is toying with perspective here, allowing her audience to reimagine their view of earthly marvels and fresh starts.


Works Cited
Lam, Linda. “Lightning Deaths the Last 10 Years, Mapped.” The Weather Channel,
22 July 2015,
Lazarus, Emma. “The New Colossus.” National Park Service, U. S. Department of the         Interior,