# data[].attributes.body
"In the logo, most of the United States and Canada is blanketed in Miss North America's billowy yellow dress."
p. 196

This personification that is used also provides a sense of imagery. Her saying how the logo has a dress on is the personification portion and the words used such as "billowy yellow dress" provides an image for the reader to see a "southern belle" type of look.

# data[].attributes.body
"Good thing all those people who hated it were dead..."
p. 198

This is such bad writing. She is just so insensitive about everything. I get that she has her own writing style, but to say it is a good thing that people are dead is going to drive readers away and make them not like her.

# data[].attributes.body
“Of course the officer sided with Amy, who, gloating as she got out of the police car, sneered at the Pontiac driver, ‘My sister is writing a book about our trip and I bet she’s going to put you in the McKinley chapter.”
p. 191

This humorous ending to the paragraph is the only thing that made this page worth reading. She has a way of making worthless information about her trip somewhat enjoyable to read. If that part hadn’t been in the paragraph, this journal would have been a rant because it seemed like a pointless paragraph. Then she made it pretty funny.

# data[].attributes.body
“This rock calls to mind Mark Hanna’s lament at his dying chum: ‘William, William, speak to me!’”
p.194

I don’t really know what this part of the text means. Is one of McKinley’s friends just worried about him? If that is what she is trying to show, why is it so confusing and that important? I really just did not get the meaning or purpose behind this section of the text. Some clarification could possibly allow me to see her purpose behind it.

# data[].attributes.body
“Republicans thought of themselves as the Union, which is to say as the United States. One would be tempted to assume that pitting Garfield against a fellow Union general of greater merit might ward off the inevitable post-Civil War Republican campaign tactics of ‘voting how you shot.’” p. 155

To me, the Democrats’ tactic seems a lot like the Thunder trying to make a super team this past offseason. They got Paul George and Carmelo Anthony to try and beat the other super team: the Warriors. Of course, just like the Democrats, this failed because they lost in the first round of the playoffs. They thought that becoming like the opposing team would beat them.

# data[].attributes.body
"One day in November, my friend Bennett and I drive out to Long Branch, New Jersey, to see where Garfield died. Garfield, remember, was shot on July 2 in D.C. Anyone who has ever sent more than ten minutes in the nation's capital between May and September knows how uncomfortable the former swamp can be, and that's without a bullet in the back."
p. 180

I find it really cool how Vowell can connect really random things together. She goes off on so many tangents. It's like we are actually inside her mind jumping from thought to thought to thought. How she can go from talking about what she is doing, to some historical fact, and then to some random thing out of the sky. It is on the other hand kind of  hard to follow along because it is so scattered.

# data[].attributes.body
"Jeff Davis's name they'll proudly praise, ah ha, ah ha. And Lincoln's tomb will be disgraced, ah ha, ah ha. The nation's flag will lose its stars. The stripes they'll change to rebel bars. And we'll all wear gray if the Johnnies get into power."
p. 155

The way this song was written has a sarcastic tone to it.  it is taunting what actually happened. It also gives off this humorous 'vibe'. It's humorous by being a parody to just a random song, and by making fun of the opposing side. It makes reading this book a little bit more interesting, by giving the readers a break from the 'normal way' of Vowell's writing; being historical facts and stories of her adventures.

# data[].attributes.body
The only thing interesting to me about this place is the fact it never appealed to anybody else." p.181

This is the kind of quirky eccentricity that I hate about this book. It is almost as if everyone in this book is trying to be the most original rare and quirky person they can be, but they also want to fit in and have a crowd that they fit in. Almost every character in this could get a job at Urban Outfitters because of how randomly angst they are.

# data[].attributes.body
"Just for fun, I decided to take a self-guided walking tour of Garfield's Washington D.C..."
p.153

In this they're trying to relate to the quirky girls of the audience reading this book. Being random appeals to the crowd that's in the book to relate to Vowell. Wants nerdy and dorky ones to be able to relate to the book as well.

# data[].attributes.body
"It is crawling with cats and I'm allergic."
p.67

I actually don't relate to this but just a little bit. I'm not allergic to cats at all. but my best friend is. I actually have two cats, and she comes over all the time. Every single time she comes over she plays and pets them, and then later gets super red eyed and starts sneezing like crazy. Then we end up having to put them up or go to her house by the end of the night.

# data[].attributes.body
"I myself become a vigilante taking justice in my own hands, shooting somebody just because I disagree with them."
p.65

Is there even a real reason to write this other than to be hurtful? Or to just be annoying as possible? There was no reason I can think of. other than to hurt people. These are ACTUAL people that were killed, and the fact she's joking about it is ridiculous.

# data[].attributes.body
"Remember that in the grandfather paradox, before I kill him.."
p.64

This is just a ridiculous statement all together. as a reader these words written are just flat out shocking, disturbing, and annoying to see in a book. The writing itself seems to be absolutely terrible, but it sadly grabbed my attention and made me want to read more. Which I would say would consider this writing good writing.

# data[].attributes.body
"Clinton's military: a gay at every porthole, a fag in every foxhole.."
p.58

Don't ask, don't tell is such a controversy. Men or women, if gay, for 17 years couldn't serve in the military and fight for our freedom. If someone, no matter who they're attracted to, wants to fight in the military should be able to. If they want to Risk their own life for the people who made these laws, they should be able to have the freedom to fight for their own independence and the country's.

# data[].attributes.body
""Lets say I give you a volkswagon. Then you give me a jaguar." Chief Ebbit never got his jag."
p.35

This analogy is so simple in words and just thinking about it. But It describes two massive deals. It retains the sense of formality and importance, through the incorporation of two car brands that are very expensive. Overall it's just flat out silly to think and to analyze it this way.

# data[].attributes.body
"But when I am around strangers, I turn into a conversational Mount St. Helens. I'm dormant, dormant, quiet, quiet, old guy loners build cabins on the slopes of my silence and then, boom,  its 1980.."
p.4

I relate so much to this one individual quote because I consider myself more quiet than not. I talk to people I know and people I have to talk to, but if I'm thrown into a room without anyone I know i'd prefer to be quiet. Not because I'm socially uncomfortable, but because I just prefer to be silent than loud.

# data[].attributes.body
“Facts about dry Tortugas National Park..”

p.68

I would evaluate this as good writing. Reason be because she finally gives us background information on what she’s been talking about for 3 pages. And I was very very confused until she finally gave information that will actually help me when reading these pages”

# data[].attributes.body
“I don’t like it out there...”
p.67

I’m very confused at to why she wrote this paragraph in the first place. Jimmy Buffet has nothing to do with someone who assassinated somebody. Did she need a filler paragraph? Something to just write about? Didn’t know what to put in this spot? Very confused. Don’t really understand it, but I really want to know why she wrote on Jimmy Buffet trying to get her point across or Dr. Mudd.

# data[].attributes.body
“I cannot decide whom I resent more... this is the worst trip I’ve ever been on”
p.66-67

A rant because I feel like this whole paragraph was very irrelevant. Yes it tells us how she got to Fort Jefferson at dry Tortugas national park, but I really don’t see a reason as to why she had to include jimmy buffet and why she hated him as much as someone who assassinated somebody else. It doesn’t really match up together. Very opposite.

# data[].attributes.body
“Slaughtering five men as their families looked on..”
p.64

She uses Emotional appeal in these paragraphs and these pages . When I read this is for sure clenched my jaw. I pictured it in my head and it twisted my stomach. And was basically just a punch in the gut. It made me feel for what they were going through in this exact moment in time by emotionally conjoining my thoughts with hers.

# data[].attributes.body
“As if we believe we can protect ourselves from suicide bombers by hiding behind blooming pots of marigolds, flowers whose main defensive property is repelling rabbits” p.24

I think I relate to not just this specific quote, but to her knowledge in writing this paragraph. I’m a very sarcastic person and mainly what comes out of my mouth is something  Smart Alec. Especially when what was said before I spoke was something very dumb or something that was obvious and they just need to think about what they say before they say it and I wouldn’t have to say something sarcastic back to the person. And that is what she sounds like writing this is you obviously can’t do something but people still think about it daily.

# data[].attributes.body
“..had had..”

I don’t necessarily think this as good writing or bad writing but it does sure effect the way I read and think of this book. Every time I see the way this is I always have to reread it and I end up getting very very confused and have to really think about it. She’s does it 4 times that I can count but this is just one specific example.

# data[].attributes.body
“Abraham Lincoln... John Wilkes booth..”

This is much of a rant of rave but I’m just very curious as to why she made so many pages on one thing. For about 20 pages all she talks about is John Wilkes booth and Abraham Lincoln and history of it. There’s other assassinations that she could talk about and I just don’t understand why she only talks about this specific one. It’s not more important than the other or more vibrant. It’s roughly like the other assassinations. Why is she obsessed with this assassination of Abraham Lincoln by Wilkes booth.

# data[].attributes.body
"I very much find these assassinations very interesting and amusing”

Did she actually think when she was writing some of her sentences? There is so many quotes and points and jokes she says is so vulgar and harsh. Especially when she says the assassinations is amusing or interesting. she kinda has the dark humor, but on the next level, and that's why reading her book you either love her writing or you absolutely hate it.

# data[].attributes.body
"A nauseating four-hour bus ride..."
p.1

Tone: Vowell sets the tone very early in Assassination vacation. Her language is very sarcastic and very personable. Usually a book about historical figures or assassinations the tone is very focused, to the point, and always on topic. They usually state the facts about the person or persons, and then move on the next. Don't talk more than needed on one person.

# data[].attributes.body
"After all, if no one had hated Lincoln, there would be no Lincoln Memorial to love."
p.17

Sarah Vowell wrote this quote to get everyone thinking that if no one hated Lincoln or killed him no one would remember him the same way. First off it wouldn't be a memorial. The memory of him would be a monument like the George Washington monument. A memorial is the celebration of life, so since someone hated him enough to go and shoot him in the back of the head there wouldn't be all of the museums about his specific assassination. Like the whole case just for the actual bullet that went into his skull.