A Rousing UVA Commencement Speech.

The article on the Onion entitled "1998 University of Virginia Graduates Still Taking Inspiration from Governor Jim Gilmore's Commencement Speech." The fact claim made by this article is that Jim Gilmore's speech to the graduating class of 1998 states that the graduates who were there for that speech constantly use the inspiration from that speech in their everyday lives. This claim is backed up with testimonials from the graduates who were at the commencement ceremony with statements like, "Everything I've done, I've done because of Jim Gilmore's speech." Other quotations from students who have drawn lifelong inspiration from Jim Gilmore's speech help wrap up the evidence that Jim Gilmore's speech is still resonating fifteen years later. The warrant here is that the students who claim to still use the words of Jim Gilmore in their everyday lives, only do so because of the lasting inspiration of his speech fifteen years ago. 

The Web's Biggest Illegal Drug Marketplace is Shut Down by the FBI

This article published by PBS NewsHour, is featured on the PBS blog titled The Rundown. The article explains the recent take down of an illegal online drug marketplace. The article explains in some detail the criminal complaint filed against the operator of the marketplace, William Ulbricht. The article is thorough and informative. As for the argument it is making, the medium used to deliver the information allows for more freedom of opinion than a regular news article, since this one is posted on a blog.

The claim could be that the FBI is doing a good job protecting and serving the United States. The claim is warranted by the evidence in the article - this includes the criminal complaint and citing the original report of the takedown by Brian Krebs. The argument is relevant and plays on the kairos of the situation - it is published at a time when the American public is not very pleased with the government and this article shows the good that the "essentials" are doing. The ethos or credibility of the article is evident in the source - a respected public news source. The use of the adjectives "incredible" and "riveting" show bias, however it is a blog post which is a medium that allow for biased writing.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/10/the-webs-biggest-illegal-drug-marketplace-is-shut-down-by-the-fbi.html

So Far, the Obamacare Rollout Looks Pretty Normal to Me

The article I read this time is So Far, the Obamacare Rollout Looks Pretty Normal to Me wroten by Kevin Drum who is a political blogger for Mother Jones.

Kevin Drum claims that the Obamacare Rollout glitches are not very serious. And according to our textbook, this claim should be a value claim and I think it is good. And then he uses his experience as grounds, because he has worked for dozens of big software which had same problem before but they are still working well. For the warrant, he shows a process of how software works after being launched which we can see that a bunch of bugs being found is very common. This part works as a bridge to connect ground and backing. So the next, he analyzed the specific steps how the Obamacare Rollout glitches will be fixed as the backing. Overall, his argument is really good. He shows the three most important parts as well as backing included in the Toulmin Model clearly and efficiently and his tight logic makes his argument very convincible.

Link: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/10/obamacare-rollout-normal-bugs-overloading

Texas store owner arrested after killing robber

I read the article, “Texas store owner arrested after killing robber” on Fox News. The owner of store has been arrested for murder after shooting a robber who attenoted to steal beer from his shop. The event shows us a debatable issue. Should we see the store owner who killed robber as a murderer? Killing people for whatever reason cannot justify. We humans do not have any right to kill other people. However, if you are in the situation that you could die by someone if you don’t kill him, should you kill him or be killed? The store owner killed the robber to defend himself. Some people dispute this opinion. They might claim that his act is excessive defense. However, how can we expect what the robber will do? If he did not shoot the robber, he could be killed by him. In general, the main argumentation is that the arrest of the store owner who killed the robber is right or wrong.The article seems to support their opinion through emphasis of the word ‘robber’. They claims that the store owner acted in self-defense. I agree with the article’s opinion. Killing someone cannot justify for any reasons. However, the point is that the owner did not try to kill someone. He just wanted to ensure his safety. We should treat his act as self-defense.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/09/30/texas-store-owner-arrested-after-killing-robber/?intcmp=obinsite 

Witness Pinpoints Hernandez

A man who survived the shootings in Boston has spoken.

"When I see (Hernandez's) face, I just recognize his face. Compare his face that night to his face now. It's that face that I remember,"

In 2012, two of an unidentified mans friends were fatally shot outside of a club on a street corner. He asked that his name not be revealed to the public for his personal safety, which was a good idea with all the violence that surrounds this situation. Stories like this always make me a little bit uneasy about the situation and constantly have me questioning the validity of a persons accusations. Whether or not this man speaks the truth and he saw Aaron Hernandez discharging a weapon from the car, it is still as story that will become controversial in todays news until there is proof. 

Alexander Bradley, a man who is currently suing Hernandez because he accuses Hernandez of shooting him in the face in Florida, is now on the run also because of connections that place him in the vehicle in Boston. His arrest warrant is now out. 

WHY would a rich, professional football player associate himself with criminals. Recipe for Disaster. 

SKorea urges united global effort against NKorea's nuclear weapons program.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/09/27/skorea-urges-united-global-effort-against-nkorea-nuclear-weapons-program/

             This article addresses that South Korea continues their strong stance toward North Korea in order to gain the international community support against North Korea's development of nuclear weapons. South Korea asserts that people have to express strong opposition to the nuclear weapons program of North Korea as it has against the use of chemical weapons in Syria. According to Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se, North Korea continues to conduct a nuclear test this year and to develop long-range missiles to threaten other neighboring countries. He also says that many nations should strive together for preventing the advent of another nuclear-armed state.

            I completely advocate the hard-line policy toward North Korea and agree with Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se. In my opinion, the blatant attempt of North Korea is to attract people's attention for money. North Korea needs tons of capital and technology for nuclear weapons, but their funds are gradually running out. That is why North Korea acts childish toward advanced countries through nuclear threats. They should stop nuclear threats for money and also must be criticized for their inhumane decision to postpone planned reunions of families separated by the past Korean War. South Korea, however, has to stand ready to help them if North Korea changes their threatening stance.

6 Reasons We Share Too Much Online, According to Behavioral Scientists

I read the article on MotherJones.com called "6 Reasons We Share Too Much Online, According to Behavioral Scientist".  The article claimed that the six reasons that we share too much online are: 1. our willingness to sell our privacy is greater than our willingness to pay for it, 2. we reflexively accept default privacy settings, 3. we're caught in a privacy/control paradox, 4. we fall for misdirection, 5. we're addicts, and 6. ignorance is bliss.  The article gave each reason, along with a little bit of an in depth explanation of each one in order to back up the claims.  The argument that the article provided was well supported by the evidence that was given with each reason.  Each reason was backed up by studies that have been performed or by professionals in this area of study.  The article also claimed that sometimes it's even better to not worry about protecting your privacy too much because, for example, "the NSA target people who use Tor anonymity software--just because."  I can definitely agree that many of these reasons make sense as to why so many people share so much personal information online, even when they are concerned about strangers being able to hack their information.

Read more here: http://www.motherjones.com/media/2013/10/science-behind-why-nobody-cares-about-online-privacy

Spinning Premium Rates (Fastcheck)

This article was about Obamacare. Obviously the author was against the program beacuse it thoroughly pointed out statistics and statements given by Obama that were false that made his argument look economically feasible. Mostly about premium percentage rates and individual market prices. There has been much discussion on what Americans can expect to pay for insurance on the state-based and federal exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act. The program is set to launch on October 1st. Republicans and critics of the law have claimed the rates will be too expensive, while Obama and the White House have said they’ll be affordable for those needing to buy their own coverage. The interesting thing is that an average is hard to discuss when each state carries a different premium charge so it does not take into account living expense or inflation. So we clearly have a biased journalist on our hands.


http://www.factcheck.org/2013/09/spinning-premium-rates/