Which Comes First, the Chicken or the Egg?

The New York Times published an article by Jesse McKinley on October 23^rd of this year, discretely targeting the large egg manufacturers (or harvesters) in California. Apparently, in early November the public will vote on an animal rights ballot measure called Proposition 2. The author does a remarkable job of presenting the arguments for and against the ballot; however, hints and winks throughout the article suggest that McKinley leans a little to the pro-animal side. Generally it would be safe to say that animal rights supporters also have a bluish, liberal tint to them; suggesting that those groups are also his intended audience.

McKinley appears very thorough with persuasive language and easy-to-read structure. Each point is made clearly, and supportive material follows directly after.  After reviewing some of his other works published in the NYTimes, credibility does not come into question.  The author incorporates anit-Proposition 2 arguments in such a way, that the reader alone can see through the preposterous claims themselves.

 For example:

“Opponents have pressed a line of attack that suggests that Proposition 2 — which would require that animals be provided room to turn around, lie down, stand up and fully extend their limbs — could expose birds, via contact with their own waste and that of other animals, to such dreaded diseases as salmonella and avian influenza. They also argue that standard egg-laying cages — a little more than eight inches square — actually protect hens from aggression by other birds and predators,” McKinley writes.

He follows up with a quote (just in case the reader wasn’t capable of thinking this on their own) from Wayne Pacelle, the president and chief executive of the Humane Society of the United States, who refers to such arguments as “far-fetched and ridiculous.”

I think this is a brilliant article exemplifying a kind of new age wave of reform and progressivism, with a different style and flare. Also, just as a personal observation, I believe that those opposing Proposition 2 who directly control and profit from the current system of confinement and cruelty fear that a ballot such as this will cause the prices of their eggs to increase; which it will. This will consequently bring their prices into less completion with “free rang” eggs that can already be purchased at any grocery store. Therefore, the public will be less hesitant to just go ahead and do the moral thing by supporting the more humane method of mass food production, possibly forcing those against reform out of business.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/us/24egg.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

What’s the Password?

An article arguing in favor of legal immigration appeared in the New York Times on October 3rd by the paper’s Editorial Board. From the stat, it becomes obvious to the reader that the article speaks to a generally liberal, left-wing audience, encouraging a smoother path for immigrants to become citizens through legal processes; at the same time making an example of those who would stand guard on the other side of an impregnable fence. However debatable, the supposedly honest members of our House and Senate are there because the majority of the population in the regions of this country decided that these people best represented their views; this would indicate that there are simply more people accountable. The article mentions specific names that both oppose and support the idea of “legal immigration,” but those people alone hold no power to either hinder or help anyone who wishes to become an American, properly or not. The NYTimes seems to agree by concluding that “The blame for its (a smoother path to immigration) failure to do that lies squarely with the hard-liners who rage against illegal immigrants, but are strangely uninterested in helping people who “play by the rules” and “wait in line.” I agree that this is a peculiar point. I have painfully listened to many a moron who seem to prefer a display of predigest and ignorance over even an iota of original critical thinking, or more importantly, problem solving. This leaves me with but one question, “So what the f@#$ is the password?” If a majority of people tend to agree that due process is the correct procedure in which to become an official American citizen, why the hell are we trying to prevent even those applicants from full admission? If a person cannot gain access to the States via “the immigration system,” then what choice have they? The sad fact of the matter is that our system has failed its people, (not to mention those who would be its people) and that we are subject to a biased disposition shameless of its vindictive and false preaching’s. The truth is that ignorance is still the most grandiose problem in the United States of America and most are not willing to do ANYTING about it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/opinion/03fri2.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin