Matt's Musings

EN140 ASSIGNMENT: Friday’s Progress

mwporter1s — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:05:48 +0000

As of Friday, I had an outline version of Essay #4. It ran about 8 pages long and made a strong case for why journalists should be protected by a federal shield law. I covered the historical aspects of press freedom and gave a number of examples of times when confidential sources made the difference and helped bring to light a major story such as Watergate, the Enron Scandal, Abu Ghraib, etc. Over the weekend, I turned my outline into a good rough draft, though it’s not quite long enough. I also needs some more sources, but I’m off to a good start.

EN140 Assignment: Wednesday’s Progress

mwporter1s — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:44:08 +0000

On Wednesday, I found a few more sources for my argument for a federal shield law for journalists. Sources for this report have been a little hard to come by, but I have found CQ Researcher has an extensive report on this issue, with lots of perspectives and analysis. The Vanity Fair article has also been a huge help. The Secret Man by Bob Woodward has also proved to be a great example of how great confidential sources can help journalists break very important stories.

EN140 Assignment: Monday’s Progress

mwporter1s — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:55:59 +0000

As I continue to work on Essay #4, I am discovering that information on journalistic shield laws may be difficult to get my hands on. It’s an important topic, but one that hasn’t been easy to research. I did however, find a very detailed article on the Judith Miller case from Vanity Fair magazine. I hope to find more such information in the future. I have looked for some books from Kent Library that will hopefully address this issue, but I have to admit, Monday’s progress was not good.

Terrorist Trial

mwporter1s — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:53:36 +0000

Last week, Attorney General Eric Holder and the Justice Department announced they will be bringing key leaders of the 9/11 terror plot to New York City to face justice in a civilian court. This action has been met with some praise, but also with a lot of anger. I happen to agree with those who are angry. The Justice Department is putting New York and the nation in great danger by bringing these men to New York. This trial will almost surely become a terror target, and the potential jurors will be in grave danger. Furthermore, such a trial is almost sure to become an attack on the Bush administration and the CIA, who used controversial interrogation methods on these terror suspects. Evidence discovered during those interrogations are almost certain to be thrown out, which means these trials may or may not result in a conviction. The Obama administration should bring these men to trial, but it should be in a military, not civililan court.

Gingrich-Dean Debate: Part 2

mwporter1s — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 18:47:23 +0000

Well, as promised, I attended the Gingrich-Dean debate Wednesday night. While I was only able to attend the first hour of the debate, which focused on health care issues, I must say I found the discussion fascinating. Both speakers did a good job making their points, though I thought Speaker Gingrich did a better job articulating his postions. (To be fair, however, I agreed with the Speaker’s position going in, and therefore that makes me a biased audience.) Still, Dean made a number of good points, but in the end he failed to change my mind. Gingrich did too good a job outlining some of the many flaws with government run health care. Was it worth spending over $80,000? I think so. Judging from the number of people in attendance, it seems the debate provided a real service to the community. Also, those not affiliated with the university paid $8 a ticket, refunding some of that large price tag. It’s a lot of money, but with healthcare making up 1/6th of the national economy, it’s just a drop in the bucket compared with the costs of being uninformed.

Gingrich-Dean Debate: Worth the Cost?

mwporter1s — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:24:06 +0000

Here on the campus of Southeast Missouri State University, all the buzz has been about the upcoming healthcare debate here on campus. The debate will be held Wednesday, October 28th at 8 pm at the Show-Me Center and is free to students. But the debate participants, former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and former Democratic Presidential Candidate Howard Dean, are hardly working for free. I expected the debators to recieve a decent, perhaps even hefty fee, but even I was shocked by the figures reported by the Capaha Arrow. The Arrow reports that Speaker Gingrich will recieve a whopping $58,450 to particpate in the debate, while Dean appears to have settled for a mere $27,000.
Now, to be fair, I realize you have to pay top dollar to get top talent. Gingrich and Dean are both well-known, articulate, and are both known for their extensive knowledge of the healthcare issue. With healthcare dominating the headlines right now, I think’s it’s important that Southeast students get the opportunity to see a well-informed debate on the issue, so they can better understand what’s at stake and be more informed in deciding what position they support. I’ll be among those in the audience Wednesday night, and Im curious to see what the speaker’s have to say. Will they be so profound as to justify an $85,450 price tag? I guess we will find out Wednesday night.

EN140 Assignment 10/12: Why I Like the Skittzo Blog

mwporter1s — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:45:49 +0000

A Blog that I would like to imitate would be Scott Nolan Smith’s blog “theSkittzo.” Smith started theSkittzo to “present conversations, debates and open discussions on everything politics, international affairs, economics, culture, society and a few random fascinations here and there.” Those are exactly what I have in mind for “Matt’s Musings.” I want to focus on all kinds of topics, with an emphasis on important political and social issues, but also with some lighthearted and humorous content sprinkled in. I do plan on using ‘the skittzo’ as a model for determing the content of my blog in the future.
I also like the look ‘theSkittzo’ blog has, and in the coming days I want to revamp my blog so it has a better look.
Another source of inspiration for me is The Daily Beast. While technically not a blog, The Daily Beast offers all kinds of thoughts and opinions from a variety of smart and intelligent writers. These writers come from all different viewpoints and write posts on a variety of different topics. When I want a smart take on what’s going on in the world, I turn to The Daily Beast.

EN140 ASSIGNMENT FOR 10/5: Improving Essay 2

mwporter1s — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:35:56 +0000

There are several changes I wish to make on Essay 2 to improve it before turning in a final draft. First off, I plan on revising my introduction. The introduction for Essay 2 was entirely too wordy, and so I plan on pairing it down. I also plan on splitting it into two paragraphs, with the first paragraph briefly discussing my topic, and the second going into more detail explaining the different types of stem cell research.
One thing I also want to improve is I want to include more academic sources. It’s harder to find academic sources, but they can be very valuable. Also, I want to look more into how embryonic stem cells can be rejected by the body. This could be a very strong point, but I haven’t developed it enough yet.

En140 Assignment for 10/7: Additional Academic Source

mwporter1s — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 02:10:14 +0000

“A Regulatory Argument Against Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research,” by Stephen Napier, published in the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, argues that embryonic stem cell research should be banned because it violates current ethics rules for scientific exploration. These rules ban experimentation on the vulnerable, and Napier lays out his argument discussing why human embroyos fit in that category. I will be using this source to discuss why embroyonic stem cell research contradicts current medical ethics rules.

Cheapening the Prize

mwporter1s — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:19:00 +0000

It’s been said that prizes and recognition are being given way too easily these days. It’s true that today’s kids often recieve medals and trophies even when they lose in sports and other competitions. Those who argue that this isn’t doing kids a favor, that it’s not teaching them how to lose, have a point. But so do those that say that kids sports is supposed to be about fun, and that no kid should walk away the “loser.”
But generally, this kind of debate was one reserved for the Little League field. Everyone understand that you didn’t get the prize for not doing anything in the real world. Or at least I thought so anyway, but since President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize yesterday, I guess I’m going to have to change my thinking.
It was always my understanding that recieving something as important as a Nobel Prize was an indication you had really, truly achieved something. Something great. In this case, you had done something great to bring about peace. Apparently not. In their announcement Friday, the Nobel committee plainly stated that they were awarding Obama more for his rhetoric and for the potential peace they believed he will bring about, rather than any actual moves he had made to bring peace to our world.
Really? They’re awarding him for what he’s MIGHT do! That’s insane! If that’s the standards were judging by, then clearly I’m doing everything backward. From now on, I want my A before I write a paper or complete an assignment, because I can tell you right now I’m going to do my best. I want my paycheck before I put in the hours, because I promise I will come in on time, not leave early, and show up every day. I definitely won’t get sick and nothing will keep me away. Oh, yeah, I want the first place trophy before I win the game, because I said I’ll win, so I must be going to win.
I don’t know about you, but this isn’t the way I want to be rewarded. I want to be rewarded based on my accomplishments, not the possibly I’ll make them. To reward someone for something you hope or believe they will do cheapens the prize. It makes it meaningless. Sadly, the once great and prestigious Nobel Peace Prize is now meaningless. Future, and perhaps very worthy, reciepents of the Prize will now not be able to stand as tall, or be as proud, because of the decision to bestow upon President Obama this once great award.
Of course, this action could produce some positive outcomes. But only if the rest of us lower our standards to meet those of the Nobel Committee. Then maybe I can recieve an A on that test–without ever taking it.