Ethan Eckersley-Ray

The editorial that I read was about the terrorist attacks in Paris at the Charlie Hebdo offices.  The writer of the article, Scott Creighton is extremely sarcastic so it was kind of hard to understand what his point of view was at first.  It then became clear through his comparisons of this attack and the Boston Bombings that he is very critical of the French police and intelligence for how they handled the attack and their search for the terrorists.  Towards the end of the article Creighton states that the trials for the Boston Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev started a two days before the Charlie Hebdo attack.  I can’t tell, because of his sarcasm if he is suggesting that there is a link between the two attacks or not.  I think that the two attacks were not connected to each other.

Anna Kressbach: Police Intervention in New York City

1. The editorial’s central claim is that reduced police presence in New York City is irresponsible and a violation of civil rights.

2. The author states that “347 criminal summonses were issued citywide, down from 4,077 over the same period last year” (One week). This shows how the police presence in the city had been drastically reduced. This was speculated to be in an attempt to clam the protestors. 

3. I believe that it was wrong to use this “broken windows” approach to the problem. Credibility is not renewed by stepping away and pretending that there isn’t a problem. It is returned when the police step in and make a positive impact on the community by protecting them like their job description entails them to do. This is not a problem that will dissolve overnight. There is a lot of work to do and it begins with the police upholding their own jobs. 

Marina Hernandez: Refugee Children Need Intervention for Trauma

Marina Hernandez

5W

http://www.pressherald.com/2015/01/02/our-view-refugee-children-need-intervention-for-trauma/ 

What is the editorial's central claim?

The author’s central claim is that refugee children should get the services they need to build a happy, productive life in America. The author believes that refugee children has survived a lot in there lives, so the trauma will cloud their future. 

2. What is a significant piece of evidence used to support the argument?

The significant piece of evidence used is the story of the life of Richard Lobor and his family. It demonstrates that Lobor excelled as a student and athlete in Maine, but was still very troubled by his past. He eventually began violating laws  by committing armed robberies and got sent to the Maine State Prison.This evidence proves that even though Lobor originally created great life for himself in America, the traumatic experiences were too great and took control of him. 

3. What is your opinion of the claim? Add your voice.

I agree with the claim made. Refugee families come here for a better life, but it won’t be too much of a better life if they don’t receive the care they need to prevent drug abuse and violence. Helping them will ultimately drug abuse and violence in Maine and create a better and more successful community. Also, the racism could decrease because society will be aware of their past and finally understand why immigrants are generally associated with drug and alcohol abuse. 

Tyler Waaler: Worst Year in Washington?

Worst Year in Washington- http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/opinions/2014/12/12/worst-year-in-washington-2014/

The editorial’s claim is that out of everyone in Washington DC, our president Barack Obama, had the worst year in Congress. In his editorial, he explains why:

Chris Cilliza, editor of the Washington Post, cited several examples explaining his view on Obama's year. He argues that although it was a hard year to be president, with problems ranging from the Ebola crisis to the rise of ISIS and the annexation of Crimea, our President handled those crises poorly, and it affected America's view of him. In 2008, he said, 75% of Americans thought that Obama could "manage the government effectively." Last March, only 48%, less than the majority, agreed. Even his own party is beginning to turn on him, with Hillary Clinton mocking his foreign policy plan in May 2014. The editor makes a case that he hurt the Democrat's reelection hopes for 2016.

I think the claim is well made, as the editor made sound points, and backed them up with fact and relevant statistics. However, I think that the media played a major role in his perceived struggles this year, and although 2014 was a tough year in which to be president, the media exaggerated his shortcomings. Can Obama make a comeback in 2015, or will he have another "Worst Year in Washington?"

Sarah Miller Editorial on Bullying

Sarah Miller

Period 3 English

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/03/opinion/omara-bullying-legislation/

The editorial is about bullying and it’s effect on it’s victims. It’s central claim is that we should outlaw aggressive bullying

(The author is a lawyer)

The  way the writer makes his point is by using the example of  a multiple suicide case to make his argument. The different case involve bullies harassing a victim continually until they committed suicide. The one he used was the Rebecca Sedwick case, in which the alleged bullies were dropped of charges, because as the article says ‘bullying is not a crime’. The writer specifically defines bullying as ‘the systematic harassment of an individual with the intent to cause substantial emotional distress’ and he uses this case to show that bullying as he defines it can be a criminal act, and that writing off cases such as this as ‘kids will be kids’ or ‘sticks and stones’ is only enabling the bullies. 

The writer then poses questions of the opposition, and, concedes the fact that there should be limits, and that kids should not be restrained from joking good-naturedly with each other. He says that it would be impossible to judge a thing such as name - calling, and that children should be brought up learning how to deal with confrontation and adversity. Again, he draws the line at systematic harassment.

I think that the person who wrote the article has some good points. Bullying can really affect a person and at the very least it should be treated more seriously, and the deadlier effects of it probably should be illegal. I think the problems would be that it would get extremely hard to convict, it could get confused with someone who didn’t really mean any harm at all, or someone could make up evidence.

Question: Do you think that bullying should be outlawed?

Colin Prato: The Dollar Value of a Stolen Life

Editorial Board at New York Times

1. The Editorial Board at New York Times believes that people wrongly convicted for a crime should not be only given money. The article talks about New York’s compensation law, in which a judge determines the amount of money someone wrongly convicted should be paid as compensation. The board believes that a monetary value shouldn’t be the only repayment given but also something to help them readjust to the outside world. 

2. A significant piece of evidence he used were the murders supposedly committed by Robert Hill, Alvena Jennette and Darryl Austin. The detective was Louis Scarcella. The three men were deemed innocent after evidence of an unreliable witness used by Scarcella surfaced, however they had been in prison for a combined total of 60 years. The board believes that these people, instead of solely receiving money should have been give more ways around the “obstacles to rebuilding their lives.”

3. My personal opinion is the same as the board’s. I do believe that prison can really ruin someone’s life, would a manager rather hire someone who was supposedly convicted for murder and sent to prison for 20 years because of it or someone who has a cleaner slate? These people need better opportunities to live the lives they deserve to live, and money just isn’t enough to give them those opportunities. 

Rebecca Davidson: A perilous year for abortion rights

Rebecca Davidson, 5B, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/20/opinion/a-perilous-year-for-abortion-rights.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

The editorial that I read was written by the New York Times editorial board, and was about the negative impact that the rapid increase of restrictions on abortion have had and will continue to have on the United States. They explain that in the past four years there have been 231 new restrictive laws, which is more than the total in the entire decade before that, and that Congress is getting ready to enact even more due to the control that Republicans have over the House and Senate. Their main argument is that these restrictions are bad for the general population of women, as the right of women to control their own reproductive lives and make their own decisions is essential to health, careers, and equality.

One significant piece of evidence that they used was that six bills have already been introduced, including one that denies any organizations that provide abortion options funds for family planning. Restrictions like this are mostly targeting organizations like this, which damages access to birth control, breast and cervical cancer screening, and abortion services for millions of low-income women. They also state that today, Thursday January 22, 2015, the House will vote on the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. This act will prohibit almost all abortions from taking place twenty weeks after fertilization, with no exceptions to protect women’s health (except in life jeopardizing situations), rapes, or incest crimes. That means that women would be forced to make a decision to have an abortion or not before being aware of any abnormalities or serious health risks, leading to fatal birthing accidents.

I agree with the editorial board on this issue. It is a basic human right to make your own decisions about your own body, and it is especially important when the decision is life changing or even jeopardizing. The article mentioned how some judges are willingly trying to block or at least minimize the passing of these unconstitutional restrictive laws. I believe these actions need to continue and increase throughout the country in order to protect the rights of women to make their own decisions and as well as their health and lives.

Sam Jones NY Times Editorial Presentation

An African's Message For America by Cassandra Herman- NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/06/opinion/an-africans-message-for-america.html?contentCollection=opinion&action=click&module=NextInCollection&region=Footer&pgtype=articl

My editorial is called ‘An African’s Message for America’ by Cassandra Herman and came out in the New York Times on 5, January 2015. The article supports and elaborates on the opinion and beliefs of a Kenyan political activist called Boniface Mwangi who recently visited Duke University to speak to students about volunteer work in the community. Mwangi’s opinion is that volunteer work in other countries has become a bit of a rite-of-passage for affluent white teenagers and young people. That many people spend lots of money to venture off to different, so-called, ‘third-world country’, to try and build things or educate people or help people, when actually the people that most are benefitting from the experience is them. In the end it usually costs so much to volunteer, when teenage kids really aren’t very useful. Sending money to a community is a much better use of your money if your goal is to help a community. Because if it’s all about the passion for helping people, there are plenty of people locally who could benefit a great deal more from your donations to a community-run program in a place than an African child who gets ‘taught’ by you for a week and then never sees you again would. 

Another thing Mwangi says is that Americans often have the idea that places like Africa and South America and Asia need to be saved by them, the rich white people. Actually Africans doesn’t need Americans to save them, but lots of Americans need Americans. There are 2.5 million Homeless children in the USA and child poverty is at the highest it’s been in 20 years. Even though it doesn’t seem as heroic, community help is needed and beneficial, more beneficial probably because it sets up connections within the community whereas that last. Young Americans flying over for week-long trips to meet children and teach them, doesn’t do very much except potentially diminish or supplant local-grown initiatives and makes us look as though we think we’re superior.

I definitely agree with the author of the article and with Boniface Mwangi’s points. I strongly believe that many a rich, white person these days will fly off to another country for an adventure and leave with a good moral idea of herself/himself and a check-mark for her/his college application. And I don’t mean to say that community service trips are bad, because I think it’s great kids want to volunteer to help other people out, I just wish people who went on them were not beforehand saying “I’m so excited to go to Africa, I’m so excited to go to Ecuador!” but instead, “I’m so excited to help people!” And even if that was the case, I think that sending money is a better way to do that.

Nicholas Kamra, 3, http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/11/opinion/guantanamo-inmate-naji/

 

1.

The editorial that I researched, Gitmo Inmate: My Treatment Shames American Flag, was written by Samir Naji, an accused al-Qaeda accomplice. He was sent to Guantanamo Bay without charge. As an inmate, interrogators would abuse and torture him in order to gain information of Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts. Naji claims that this treatment shames the American flag. However, the American flag not only represented the literal flag that he was forced to salute to, but the country’s constitutionality and morals.

2.

    Samir Naji still has a keen sense of what happened in Guantanamo Bay. There wasn’t just one piece of evidence to support his claim. His whole editorial describes poor treatment towards prisoners, and how he was sent to Guantanamo Bay. In one instance, two teams of interrogators would question him “day and night”. He was told to identify certain individuals, when in fact the majority of them he had never seen in his life. When he didn’t answer they would hit him “on the face and back”, and then would be injected with a substance to knock him out. Another time, he describes one instance where he was “in a sort of cinema room” where he had to “watch videos of other prisoners being abused.”. Naji then wrote, “Then they tell me that I have to dance for them, and run in circles whilst they pull on my chains. Every time I try and refuse, they touch me in my most private areas.” The most shocking piece of evidence was his trial and sentence to his awful incarceration into Guantanamo Bay. Naji was sent there without charge. Then in 2009 he was cleared for released, however, he was never set free. With all these factors, he was then forced to salute the American flag.

3.

    I believe what happened to not only Naji, but all prisoners, in Guantanamo Bay is a wake-up call to Americans. In our constitution not only are American citizens entitled to a fair trial, but are protected from cruel and unusual punishment. The CIA, responsible for Guantanamo Bay imprisonments, claim that not only are the accused “al-Qaeda prisoners” not American citizens, but are not on American soil where they are placed in “coercive interrogation” (however, Guantanamo Bay is actually owned by the American government so it is technically American soil). But, if our morals go along the lines of our constitution, shouldn’t we still treat foreigners with the same humility we treat our neighbors and other American citizen with. Naji’s case is just one more reason for me to take his side in the argument, that his treatment does shame the American flag. 

Paul McNeil: Why Ferguson Isn't As Bad As It Seems

Published by Portland Press Herald.


The editorial’s claim is that although what happened in Ferguson with Michael Brown was undoubtedly a tragedy, but it has a good side in that we can use this to move closer to equality for all, without racism. He also states that we are really much further along towards peace and equality that the media would have us think.

He argues for this by saying that no one thinks about racism unless media try to spark it to improve their ratings, or a politician tries to use it to secure a vote. Most of the time, however, he talks how whites do things that would be unthinkable decades earlier, such as cheering for a mostly black sports team, and have whole days dedicated to black people of history.

I think the claim is well made, as it really shows that America is a much better place than everyone tries to make it out to be. News corporations will try to dish out assumptions and most of the people will accept that as fact. These people then try to act as if they know the whole story perfectly, and say that this proves how racist whites are. I believe that no one knows all the facts in this case, so unlike the Rodney King days, people should not use this as a way to call America racist, but use it as a way for America to improve.

Sarah Kirk: Respect for NYPD Squandered in Attacks on Bill de Blasio

Sarah Kirk, 5B, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/30/opinion/police-respect-squandered-in-attacks-on-de-blasio.html?_r=0

I covered an editorial by the New York Times Editorial Board on the behavior of NYPD officers towards Mayor Bill de Blasio. It addresses the action taken by officers at the funeral of Officer Rafael Ramos where many turned their backs on the mayor as he spoke. This followed another incident where officers turned their back on de Blasio and become a fairly common way for officers to express their disapproval of the mayor because have remarks he made in the wake of a grand jury refuses to indict the officer who administered a chokehold to Eric Garner and rising tensions between police and the public following protests sparked by the Garner case in New York and the Brown case in Ferguson. They believe de Blasio was provoking tension by not explicitly supporting the NYPD and ultimately this led to the shooting of Officer Ramos and his partner Officer Liu.

The central claim made by the board was that while the officers had the right to be frustrated with the “thanklessness of being a cop”, the disrespect of this action was inexcusable as it was essentially saying they did not approve of the mayor, and therefore the 73% of constituents who elected him. The mayor had only been calling for a review of actions such as these to improve relations with the public, but the Editorial Board argued that anger at this implies that police believe that they are above the law and above review, in addition to the inappropriateness of politicizing an event to honor a fallen colleague. The board also argues that accusing Mayor de Blasio of being “anti-police” is absurd when you look to his support of broken window policing and in increase in funds to the NYPD to modernize the protection of officers. Another this de Blasio was attacks for was when he mentioned that he told he biracial son if he ever came into conflict with police officers to be respectful and comply because he would have to be more cautious due to his appearance.The board argues that there is nothing offensive about this statement.

I do agree that the timing of the actions was inappropriate, and, that while police concerns are valid, Mayor de Blasio is in the right in his criticism of the relationship fostered between the police and the public. Although it is a sensitive topic which generates strong feelings on both sides, it needs to be addressed as shown by the unrest across the nation following Ferguson and the Garner case.

Catherine Thompson: Gun Control isn't the Answer

Catherine Thompson 5B http://www.latimes.com/la-oe-wilson20apr20-story.html

1. The central claim of this editorial is that increased gun control isn't as effective as Americans think it will be. A common belief is that gun control has been easy and successful for Europe, more specifically England, however the author claims the transition was not easy and has not been as effective as many of us believe. Another important claim is that guns can play a crucial roll in self defense. 

2. The editorial often compares Europe's statistics to America's statistics. For example, the editorial cites that in 2000, the rate that people were robbed or assaulted was higher in European countries than in the United States. The point is that gun control doesn't necessarily prevent violence.

3. I don't believe in more gun control. If someone has the urge to shoot up a school, they will find a way. It won't matter if guns are legal or not. Also, it would be nearly impossible to rid the United States of guns. There are already so many preexisting weapons that it would be impractical to get rid of them all. Furthermore, I do not believe that guns kill people. People kill people. If we wish to end or decrease gun violence then I suggest we catch those who are prone to do it before they have the opportunity to get their hands on a weapon. 

Ben Dow: Shifting Politics on the Death Penalty

Ben Dow

4W

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/05/opinion/shifting-politics-on-the-death-penalty.html

The central claim of this Editorial, named  Shifting Politics on the Death Penalty, is about the change in thought about the death penalty and the political stances on it. It claims that the death penalty is becoming a smaller and more looked down upon area of our society.

The editorial cites how in 1992, during the presidential race and while he was still governor, Bill Clinton flew back to Arkansas to see the execution of a man that he did not grant clemency to. The author cites that it was seen as a way to show that democrats were not soft on crime. The author then uses a more recent example of how the governor of Maryland granted clemency to several criminals on death row, instead making them serve life without parole. The author was able to show the difference in thought of the death penalty in this way.

I think that the Death Penalty is morally wrong and should not be used for the most part. I also believe that more people are beginning to think of it as a moral wrong as well.  

Topher Pidden, 5W, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11340029/What-if-the-terrorists-were-Christian.html

2. The editorials central claim was that if “To understand how to respond to the Charlie Hebdo atrocity, we only have to imagine what would happen if the situation was reversed”  what if the terrorists were christian. The main point is displayed in the final line, “Because even if we don’t see ourselves as Charlie, our enemies do.”

3. Very little actually evidence used. The editorial used real events and discussed them as if the situation was changed. Most the editorial’s piece is hypothetical and analyst. The main piece of evidence used was when the author talked about the similarities between Anders Behring Breivik and the attacks on Charlie Hebdo. 

4. I agree with author on many of his points. Firstly, I agree that, too fully understand the terrorist, we must think of these attacks in reversal.  If our people were the attackers would we feel differently? Also that the proper response isn’t to react with the same hatred displayed by these terrorists, or use offensive language and derogatory comments.   After such acts of hatred and atrocities one most gauge their response with caution, but a strong decisive response is necessary.  

Andrew Beatty

Tommaso, 5B

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/13/opinion/choke-first-ask-questions-later.html

Central Claim: The central claim of this article is that the New York Police Department is corrupt in all aspects of work. To begin with, the author comes right out and attacks the police in Eric Garner’s case stating that they violated section 203-11 of the departments Patrol Guide. He later goes on to state that the Departments Advocate’s Office and Raymond Kelly, the police commissioner at the time, had repeatedly rejected the board’s recommendations for severe punishment to police who use chokeholds, and decided to impose lesser penalties or none at all. The public’s confidence in its Police Department is shaken.

Significant Piece of Evidence: The significant piece of evidence used in this case is the policy 203-11 of the New York Police Patrol Guide that states: “Members of the New York City Police Department will NOT use chokeholds.” Eric Garner’s case is the reason why this policy is enforced. Police forcefully choked Garner until he begged for his life, later to die in the hospital. Reality is dangerous for civilians the author later states.

My Opinion: I believe the author makes a strong point in claiming the New York Police Department needs much improvement to gain the civilians trust back. Civilians around the country were shocked by the story of Eric Garner and these recent facts stating Raymond Kelly and the Department’s Advocate’s Office simply rejected the Civilian Complaint Board’s recommendations leading to little or no punishment make their trust even more slim. I agree with the author’s statement that reality is dangerous for civilians because one cannot simply resist arrest from police; They are untouchable.

Clarity on Climate Change - Patrick Grant

http://search.proquest.com.ursus-proxy-10.ursus.maine.edu/newsstand/docview/866521613/EC9BB23F8D0D466CPQ/3?accountid=17222

What is the editorial's central claim?

The central claim of the article states that climate change is definitely occurring, but the government is not doing enough to help try and fix the problem. Written by Anonymous, the author claims that science has the data to back it's position on climate change, stating that human actions can (and will) lead to breakdowns in human and natural systems.  The author specifically targets the Republican Party for not seeing the reality of the situation and are therefore not willing to take on the responsibility.

What is a significant piece of evidence used to support the argument?

A specific piece of evidence used by the author would be that the scientific community has tracked the cause of climate change with research, data, and therefore evidence that climate change is directly related to human action.  So, in essence, the author is actually using evidence from the scientific community to back his claim.  Nevertheless, Anonymous repeats this evidence over and over, in different forms in order to keep attacking the government lack of concern for this issue.

What is your opinion of the claim?

I completely agree with the claim presented by the author because I am a passionate believer in maintaining a green world and cutting down on pollution in any way that we can.  Unfortunately, we may be too late in trying to solve these issues because carbon emission levels are still very high and damaging.  Also, even if the United States Government does enforce more and more plans to cut down carbon emissions, what are the chances that we will stick to these rules?  Despite this bleak personal outlook, I see hope, as does the author, that we will respond and slow emission rates enough so that the earth will not be damages.

Lucas Prescott Editorial

Lucas Prescott

4W AP Lang & Comp

http://www.pressherald.com/2015/01/11/our-view-the-death-penalty-wrong-for-maine/

1. This editorial’s central claim is that the death penalty is wrong for Maine.  It claims that the state’s 

life without parole is the best possible punishment for the worst criminals.

2. A bill proposed by Senator Bill Diamond is coming to Maine that will reinstate the death penalty for child sex offenders.  The editorial states that the death penalty does not act as a deterrent of these crimes.  The editorial states that child molesters don’t think rationally, therefore won’t be dissuaded by the death penalty.  Plus, why should Maine reinstate something that it banned over a century ago?

3. I agree with the editorial.  Punishing killing with killing doesn’t solve the problem.  Life in prison without parole is the best way to punish horrible crimes.  I don’t only think this about Maine, but also about the entire country.  The death penalty doesn’t solve anything, and life in prison is the best possible punishment.

Q: Do you agree with this bill or do you think that the death penalty should be reinstated?

Meredith Hawkins-Personality in School

http://op-talk.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/01/10/should-schools-teach-personality/?ref=opinion

Source: New York Times Opinion Section

Title: Should Schools Teach Personality? 

Author: Anna North

Published: Saturday, January 10

 Editorial’s Central Claim: The author claims that many researchers have thought that personality is more important than intelligence when it comes down to the question of a student’s success in school. It is true though, that some feel this approach could distract policy makers from the problems that actually need attention in their curriculums and systems. North cites a number of researchers who have studied the correlation between a student’s personality traits and their success in the classroom, and many of whom, have varied opinions regarding just how much a students inner characteristics drive their academic initiatives. 

Evidence: As mentioned, North pulls from many different sources to write her editorial, and all provide interesting insights into the question of “teaching personality.” She references an Australian psychologist, Arthur E. Poropat, who concluded that both conscientiousness (which he defines as the tendency to be “diligent, dutiful, and hardworking”) and openness within a student are more correlated with a students’ performance than pure intelligence is. He believes that person’s personality can change over time to a much larger extent than that of intelligence which is why he suggests an incredibly strong link between personality and performance.  This so called perseverance of the personality-performance link is beginning to be taken as far as teaching classes entitled “grit” during the school day. North cites a school in Perland Texas that teaches a class on this personality trait. The class focuses on teaching kids that those who have true success have a passion for a long-term goal and persevere when the task gets difficult.  They focus on people like Malala Yousafzai and others who have overcome immense challenges. 

North cites that this focus on character has also encountered criticism and provides some counterarguments to the previously mentioned research. People like Alfie Kohn, a speaker and writer of education argue that traits like grit aren’t always helpful. Kohn believes that an emphasis on children’s personalities could take the attention away from the problems within their schools. He thinks that many people are spending too much time thinking that student need to try harder or improve their attitudes when really the various aspects of the school system itself need to be reevaluated. 

Other arguments posed by North say that understanding the personality of a student can help teachers cater their instruction to fit a students needs. Suggestions have been made to work toward helping students find their pathway and interests rather than trying to teach them their personalities. This approach focuses on helping students become “gritty”, if you will, in something they love to do rather than “gritty” under all circumstances. Because, quite frankly, it is hard to be “gritty” and committed to something that you’re is not passionate about. 

Opinion/Blog Post?: I agree with this last approach as I think it is somewhere in between. I personally don’t believe a class on various personality traits is necessary to teach students what it means to have perseverance, dedication, grit, conscientiousness, or what have you. However, I do believe that an environment that fosters individual expression and personality application is the best type of learning space. I think our school does a great job of “teaching” grit and conscientiousness in a sort of behind-the-scenes kind of way. I mean, we don’t have any classes on it, but we have a very motivated student body. I think part of that is our community but also the environment that we learn in and the way our teachers allow us to freely express our opinions and viewpoints.

Breanna 5B 

http://search.proquest.com.ursus-proxy-10.ursus.maine.edu/mainenews/docview/1643077412/2FE20F598757419FPQ/4?accountid=17222

1. What is the editorial's central claim?

Maine is not attracting big companies, which will give Mainers' jobs like we used to. Companies want places where they can give work to cheap laborers and the sell their products to. Maine is not competing with other states by lowering their wages which makes companies want to come. The articles also says that Maine does not have a "large enough skilled workforce for the economic giants that make them look into our direction". Companies are not getting what they want out of Maine so they aren't coming.

2. What is a significant piece of evidence used to support the argument?

Some evidence that is use is that "We don't have an academic-industrial complex like Massachusetts or California, which are magnets for high-tech firms." We aren't standing out for these businesses. It also doesn't help because "we certainly won't lower our wages to compete with Alabama, Mexico or China or match their abysmal environmental or safety standards." We have certain standards that we are not changing that other places are that make companies want to go there. 

3. What is your opinion of the claim? Add your voice.

We should not try to compete with bigger states than Maine to get the chain businesses to come. We should use what we have such as lobsters and other seafood, to create a business around our standards to create jobs for Maine. Instead of have Maine work for chain businesses such as Wal-Mart, Dunkin Donuts, etc, where they don’t treat the workers like we want them, we should stay as we are and use what we have. 

Editorial

Lucas Uhl

3rd period AP lit.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-death-penalty-alabama-judicial-override-20141119-story.html

1. The editorial’s central claim is that the death penalty is not based on the severity of the crime but instead on outside influences.  The author thinks this should be changed.  

2. The author uses a case in Montgomery, Alabama in 1997 as the primary example.  Four guys robbed a vehicle and only one of them got the death penalty even though they were all charged of the same crime.  The jury unanimously voted for a life sentence for the man but the judge overturned it.  His basic reasoning was that the guy didn’t accept the plea and therefore didn’t take responsibility for his actions.  The author points out that the judge was not treating the man as innocent until proven guilty.  

3. My personal opinion is that the death penalty should’t exist in America.  I believe killing someone really does not solve any problems ever.  I also believe that anyone can redeem themselves at any point in their lives no matter what they have done.  Killing someone for a crime robs them of that opportunity and creates an atmosphere of fear.  I believe societies shouldn’t be run on fear but rather the idea that doing the right thing benefits everyone.  

Colleen Sullivan

Ms. Lewis

5W

January 8, 2015 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/13/opinion/keeping-the-mentally-ill-out-of-jail.html?_r=1 

1.) The editorials central claim is that we should do whatever we can to try to assist the mentally ill people that end up in jail.  We should pay more attention to these people because almost 40% of the 11,000 inmates in New York City have some sort of mental illness.  

2.) This editorial states facts and opinions but an important part of the editorial tells how we can help these people and how there is already a plan set in place to assist them.  It was put in place by the mayor of New York City, Bill de Blasio.  It will cost $130 million over four years but even though it’s quite costly, they think that it will overall help the mentally ill.  The program that is proposed consists of many components but one of the most important (and the most difficult) parts is to set up supportive housing for the mentally ill inmates.  This housing will have social and psychiatric services to help the mentally ill learn how to live independently.  Bill de Blasio thinks that jail shouldn’t be the choice of housing, but for many people, that is what it has become and that needs to change as soon as possible.  

3.)  I do agree with the claim here.  I obviously understand that there’s always going to be mentally ill people that will land in jail, but this plan is also trying to provide them with better mental health and drug treatment while they’re in jail.  I feel as though the plan makes sense, and could really help New York City if it will truly work.  If it is successful, perhaps it could spread nationwide.  The statistics say that mentally ill inmates cost quite a bit more to house than other inmates, because they often stay twice as long.  If this is true, then as taxpayers, all of us are paying to support these people in jail that may not even need to be there.  We need to get these people out of the jails to save our money and help these people get back on their feet.  

Caroline Augenblick, 2W, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/08/opinion/hounding-the-roma-in-france.html

What is the editorial's central claim?

The editorial’s central claim focuses on the increased discrimination of the Roma in France. The author declares that instead of harassing the Roma, France should end the discrimination, help combat their poverty, and assist them to enter in to France’s society. The European Union has already started to fund programs to help the Roma which should influence France to take the initiative to help too. 

2. What is a significant piece of evidence used to support the argument?

Recently, a mayor refused to allow a Roma baby to be buried in his town. Although many, such as Prime Minster Manuel Valls, made statements showing that this event was an insult to France, evidence shows that most remarks are meaningless. For example, in 2013 Mr. Valls said “that the Roma from Bulgaria and Romania can never be integrated into French society and should return to their countries or origin.” Other government leaders similar to François Hollande and Nicolas Sarkozy also have policies of forced evictions and deportations of the Roma population. Maria Francesca, the infant who died, lived in a house with no electricity or running water. Her community had already been evicted from nearby municipality. The mayor, Christian Leclerc, who denied her burial said she had “no right to a plot.” The Leclerc’s actions show how deeply rooted Roma prejudices are in France. 

3. What is your opinion of the claim? Add your voice.

I completely agree with the author’s claim. France should be progressive in its attitude toward accepting different nationalities. Even though many people dislike the Roma population, the Roma are in poverty and they need France’s help. By reading this article, I developed the impression that the Roma do not have good jobs or bring in much money. If France aids the Roma, it could create a better and more educated workforce. The long term affect of helping and educating the Roma would be positive for France because it would help their industry. 

Abbi Smith, 2W, http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2014/12/07/faa-flying-blind-drone-regulation/OO4HIaE4HQv037gJ2PbXyL/story.html

Central Claim:
I believe that the central claim of this article is that the use of commercial drones would benefit society. This article claims that these drones have already proven to be beneficial by surveying crops  and livestock, monitoring endangered species, and giving birds-eye-views on search and rescue missions.

Evidence Used:
The article used several different specific pieces of evidence including the already mentioned benefits of commercial drones. The article also used several different statistics as hard facts to support the use of drones. Specific companies such as Amazon, Domino's, and Google were mentioned as supporters of commercial drone use.

Opinion:
In my opinion, I feel like commercial drones are good for deliveries with companies such as Amazon, Google, and Domino's, yet I don't think that drones should be available to the public. Personally, I feel like drones could be an invasion of privacy around homes and personal properties. I would only be comfortable with commercial drones if the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) put heavy regulations and restrictions on who was able to own and control a drone. Overall, commercial drones could be beneficial for companies such as Amazon and Domino's, but I don't think it would be a good idea to offer the public access to commercial drones.

Wellesley College anti-Semitism 

Liz Clark

5W

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/12/11/wellesley-college-can-tiptoe-around-anti-semitism/WIvHJbNnp4s4U87VfoZfHP/story.html

1. What is the editorial's central claim?

The central claim made in this article by Lawrence Harmon is that discrimination around the world such as anti-Semitism and racial inequalities are still very present in everyday life. 

2. What is a significant piece of evidence used to support the argument?

Back in 1983, Harmon while writing for the Jewish Advocate weekly newspaper received copies of correspondence between the Wellesley president, Ruth Adams, and the religion professor at the time, Roger Johnson. In these letters, there were debates over the appointment of a Jewish chaplain. Harmon claims that these letters showed primary points of anti-Semitic view points. Specific evidence of anti-Semitisim in the past of Wellesley college includes the facts that during the 1930s and ’40s, Wellesley College managed its discomfort with Jews by limiting their enrollment to about 10 percent. Even decades later, Jewish professors were deemed incapable of teaching courses on the New Testament. It wasn’t until 1981 that a Jewish professor was hired in the religion department. Later on in the 1990s Tony Martin, an extremely anti-Semitic professor of Africana studies, wrote his own book called “The Jewish Onslaught”. Wellesley college were afraid from this to confront the issue with anti-Semitism that was so prevalent in the history of the college. 

3. What is your opinion of the claim? Add your voice.

Overall, my opinion on the matter is that anti-Semitism is a very critical offense especially when there are Jewish people attending the school. This topic is very important to present day time because there has recently been many acts of discrimination such as police attacks seen to be as racial attacks. This article is meant to focus on anti-Semitism, but to me it also is clearly stirring up more about discrimination and racial inequalities than just anti-Semitism. 

Lucy Alexander, 5B, http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21636040-experiments-designed-learn-more-about-ways-geoengineering-climate-should-be-allowed

CLAIM:

The editorial’s central claim focuses on the potential remedies for global warming. It makes the point that although methods of geoengineering, such as spraying minuscule pieces of salt into clouds to make them “shinier,” may seem risky and potentially harmful to the environment, they could be used as insurance and can not be ignored in the fight against global warming if current methods fail to work.  

EVIDENCE:

The editorial pushes for the conduction of experiments to see if geoengineering is a feasible solution to global warming. It argues that “The experiments would be far too small to have any climatic effects. The amount of sulphur put into the stratosphere by the experimental balloon would be 2% of what a passenger jet crossing the Atlantic emits in an hour.” Therefore, we should have no excuse to not put these experiments to work. There is also no evidence that the planet is going to miraculously start getting cooler. The editorial mentions that even with carbon emission cuts, it will still take a while for the cuts to make an impact on the environment, and in the meantime, the temperature will keep rising. To prove this, the editorial says that “Although they have not soared in the past couple of decades as they did in the 1980s and 1990s, there is a fair chance that this year will tie with the hottest on record.” Thus, geoengineering experiments should be seriously considered for the future.

OPINION:

I would agree with the editorial that we definitely need to find other methods to address the problem of global warming. The idea of spraying reflective particles into the air made me nervous at first because I thought that it would negatively affect the environment. After reading the editorial, I determined that it is a good idea to look into geoengineering. Performing small tests would not affect the environment and would provide substantial information as to if geoengineering is a good option. I think we should definitely perform many tests to be sure of all of the consequences of geoengineering before we actually do anything on a large scale. I personally feel that we should use geoengineering as a last resort (if it does work), because I think there are probably many other methods that would be safer, more effective, and not cause as much debate, such as more cuts on carbon emissions and the creation of smaller, more fuel efficient cars.

Walter Conrad
Period 3 - AP Language and Composition
Link:  http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/04/opinion/sunday/the-liberation-of-growing-old.html

Article:  The Liberation of Growing Old by Anne Karpf
Date Published:  January 3, 2015

What is the editorial's central claim?

The editorial's central claim seems to be that the growing "ageism" in America needs to stop.  The author comments on the fact that old people in contemporary society are mostly seen only as a drain on resources or a looming problem despite the fact that old people have real value and experience. Overall, the claim is that Americans should become more accepting and welcoming of age, an inevitable part of every person's life.


What is a significant piece of evidence used to support the argument?

The author uses multiple pieces of evidence to support the argument.  First of all, she tells a little about her own life as a 64-year-old woman.  This fact lends credibility to her claim because she has experienced what she is writing about firsthand.  The author also references certain actions that are taking place in the US which seek to include old people and break the barrier between young and old; for example, creative city spaces in Portland, Oregon are designed to be more inclusive for old people, and "intergenerational charter schools" in Cleveland, Ohio are helping to allow young people and old people to maintain closer contact.  Her use of evidence supports her claim that old people have something to offer and that ageism is unnecessary and silly.


What is your opinion of the claim?

In my opinion, the claim is accurate.  For some reason, in this society old people are the subjects of countless demeaning stereotypes.  Ageism is very silly and very counterproductive. Americans seem to be afraid of old people rather than embracing the fact that they will one day be old too.  I also definitely see the barrier that is forming between young and old people.  I barely ever see anyone "old" unless my grandparents come to visit.  I think that old people definitely have something to offer.  After all, they have lived a long life already and probably have a great deal of knowledge and many experiences to share.  That said, I do wonder about the effects that a rapidly growing elderly population may pose on a society such as America.  The cost of supporting so many people has the potential to be great.  However, that is certainly not the fault of old people themselves; it's just natural.  We all age.  We all contribute to the problem.


Does anyone look forward to growing old?

Editorial of the Day: Still Failing Syria’s Refugees

Jack Venden, Period 3, link: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/14/opinion/sunday/still-failing-syrias-refugees.html?_r=0

The author’s central claim is that the wealthier countries in the United Nations like China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Britain, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and the United States are turning their backs on the 9 million Syrian refugees who have been displaced by the civil war that has been raging in their home country for four years. He/she claims that countries like Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt (Syria’s neighbors), as well as Germany and Sweden are taking in as many refugees as their economies and territories can support while, larger, more prosperous nations are taking in few, if any, Syrian refugees and leaving the burden to the less wealthy nations.

Facts:

Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt alone have accepted 3.2 million Syrian refugees

China and Russia (who have funded Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad’s military campaign against the rebels) and wealthy Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (who back various militant groups in the war) have refused to take a single refugee

the United States has only accepted a total of 300 Syrian refugees

4) I think the United States, Russia, China, and the European powers should accept the responsibility of being the world’s most powerful nations and provide temporary living facilities for Syrians within their own borders until the war comes to an end.

1. Annabelle Elvidge, Period 3, http://www.theforecaster.net/news/print/2014/12/08/intentionally-unreasonable-maine-yarmouthians-are/219663
2. Within this editorial (by Steve Woods) his central claim is about how with modern day technology and its availability, it is important to take time to recognize, honor, and understand the people and places connected to one’s past.
3. Woods supports his claim with soft facts about the town of Yarmouth, having shared names in Cape Cod and Nova Scotia, but centrally about Yarmouth, Maine’s roots in Yarmouth, England. He then uses a personal anecdote about how he conversed with the mayor of Yarmouth, England to schedule a visit for himself and his daughter. He talks about his journey as a wake-up call where the connection between both towns were connected with more than just the same name; “...we shared a sense of community and history; some common, some born from conflict, and some divided by an endless ocean.” Woods also explains that in order to help people reconnect with the roots of where they live that there should be an exchange program where students from each Yarmouth switch locations and live in the other Yarmouth for a period of time, essentially to gain an understanding of the connection between the two.
4. My opinion on this topic is quite the same as the Woods’. I think it is important to know exactly who and what your home originates from. Regardless of how quick and easy it would be to simply use Google Earth and get a sense of the origins of a town, experiencing it and getting a first-hand understanding is without a doubt more beneficial.

Outside information/facts:

“The River Yar is a body of water that approaches the mouth of their harbor, hence, Yar-mouth, or Yarmouth.”

Yarmouth, England’s first Town Charter was established in 1135 A.D

Questions:

-do you like the idea of this type of exchange student? Would you want to go to Yarmouth, England

-paul/ricky wanted me to ask if we think that we should still be a colony of england…

-