Current Event 2/25/11

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/23/lawmakers-consider-proposal-arming-agents-mexico-ice-attack/

Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers are considering options to allow US agents in Mexico to carry weapons, which has been banned since 1990. The death of US agent Jaime Zapata and the wounding of another agent in an ambush by drug cartels prompted this deliberation. US agents are more at risk now that Mexican president Calderon has declared war on the drug cartels, and lawmakers don't like the idea of US agents being "sitting ducks." The ambush was called a "game changer" as the US operational assumption has been that US agents would not be targeted.

Who: US ICE agent Jaime Zapata was killed less than two weeks ago by drug gangs. His death has prompted arming measures.

What: lawmakers are considering how to arm US agents in Mexico.

When: Zapata was killed February 15, 2011, and Congress is discussing measures now.

Where: The Capitol is the likely site of most hearings and considerations.

Why: There is concern that the US agents in Mexico are sitting ducks because they are not allowed to carry weapons.

This article was journalism because it described the current state of American agents in Mexico and detailed their difficulties, something the American public should know. It is effective because it uses logic, current events, and relevant facts to support its main push, which is apparently for the arming of US agents. The article is a bit biased towards the arming of US agents.

The CBT of Sin: Social Science most applies to this article. Mankind is corrupt without repentance, and the murder of the ICE agent proves so. Zapata was murdered in cold blood, and he was not armed. Murder is a clear example of Man's corruption.

Current Event 2/18/11

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gibson-extortion-20110217,0,6507720.story

This article is an adult version of middle school girls' arguments and gossip. Mel Gibson's attorney was informed that Gibson's girlfriend had recorded his racist rants and verbal abuse and was asking for 20 million dollars. However, the girlfriend's lawyers wanted the couple to solve their issues privately and not publicize the tapes. The focus of the article is whether or not Gibson's girlfriend is guilty of extortion; meanwhile, Gibson is being investigated for domestic violence charges.

Who: Mel Gibson and his girlfriend, and their lawyers, are the main figures.

What: Gibson's girlfriend is suspected of extorting Gibson with the tapes as blackmail.

Where: The story took place in LA County, but the courts are the eventual locations.

When: Gibson's lawyers were informed 11 months ago of the tapes' existence, and Wednesday the detectives presented their findings to the district attorney's office.

Why: The purpose of the article is gossip, and the cause of the story is romantic trouble between Gibson and his girlfriend.

This article is not journalism. Its only effects on me were irritation and eye-rolling, as the article begs the question, "who cares?" It is sad that Gibson and his girlfriend are fighting, but what business of the public is it? This article does not qualify as journalism because it does not help the reader become more self-governing.

The CBT of this article is the CBT for Social Science: Sin. Mankind is totally depraved without repentance, and this article shows several examples of it. First, Gibson and his girlfriend are fighting, verbally abusing and blackmailing each other. Secondly, the girlfriend publicized Gibson's rants to hurt Gibson. Thirdly, the public gossips and snoops about the celebrities' private business.

Current Event 2/11/11

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/10/brewer-countersue-federal-government-immigration-enforcement/

Arizona governor Jan Brewer announced Thursday, February 11, 2011, that Arizona will be filing a counter-suing lawsuit against the federal government because the feds have not secured the Arizona border. This is a response to the Obama administration's lawsuit against Arizona's SB 1070. Brewer's complaint is that the feds have given her no other choice because they have failed to secure the border and Arizona is picking up the tab. The feds have not reimbursed Arizona as they are obligated to do.

According to Brewer, it is ridiculous for the feds to sue Arizona for enforcing federal laws. She expressed her desire to push the law to the Supreme Court if necessary.

Who: The main "character"of the article is Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, who was the mastermind behind the SB1070.

What: Jan Brewer is filing a counter lawsuit against the federal government for not securing the borders and not reimbursing Arizona for its efforts to do so.

Where: The area in question is the southern border of Arizona with Mexico, but the courts will be the literal locations of the article's topic.

When: Jan Brewer announced Thursday, February 11, 2011 her plans to sue the federal government.

Why: The federal government has not secured the southern border, and Arizona wants it to be secured on the fed's tab.

This article is effective because it is not biased, and it reports the facts and the reasoning behind Jan Brewer's motion. It does not provide alternate viewpoints, nor should it. The article is on Jan Brewer's reasoning and lawsuit, not the topic of illegal immigration. It covers the necessities of such an article: why Jan Brewer is suing the feds, her resolve, and the history of SB1070.

The CBT of Social Science: Sin: is applicable to this article. This CBT states that the purpose of laws is to restrain the depravity of man, both the governors and the governed. This article handles the governors, and Jan Brewer's Arizona is suing the federal government for not enforcing the laws. The law system is keeping the feds in check, at least theoretically, by providing Arizona with the ability to sue the federal government for not enforcing its laws.

Current Event 2/4/2011

Western wolverines threatened by climate change

-pi

This article details the "plight" of the western wolverine, a species that could be extinct in the continental US by the end of the 21st century. According to Synte Peacock, a scientist from the National Center for Atmospheric Research, rising global temperatures could soon melt the snow that is critical to the wolverine's survival. This model is based on an extrapolation of existing data, projecting future temperatures and weather patterns. The Fish and Wildlife Service has decided that climate change's threat to the wolverine merits its addition to the endangered species list.

Who: The author is Nicholas Riccardi from the Greenspace blog. The article's main focus, though, is on the theories of NCAR's Synte Peacock, a climate scientist.

What: According to Peacock, the western wolverine is in danger from the rising temperatures that threaten the snow it depends on.

When: There was no particular date, but the article was posted February 3, 2011, and the article focused on the latter half of the century.

Where: The western wolverine is a boreal carnivore/scavenger of the forests of North America, the main locality of interest.

Why: The motive for the article seems to be the addition of the western wolverine to the endangered species list.

This article is not journalism, nor is it effective. It is flagrantly biased, and quotes only the pro-climate change view. It does not affect me to any degree, though it might affect a reader with less solidified opinions. Its bias is what makes it ineffective, and it is this bias coupled with its presentation as news that makes it not journalism. Technically, it may be journalism in the sense that it uses "facts" to back up its claims. However, it only quotes a scientist's climate model's extrapolation and seeks to base policy on it. No mention is made of the controversial nature of the climate debate.

The CBT of Revelation for Social Science asserts that truth is not relative, and is relevant to this article because of the article's controversy. Either climate change is real or it is not; if it is, either it is man-caused or natural. Truth is not relative, and both sides cannot be right.