Summary Of Justice Antonin Scalia

When I was looking for an argument to analysis, I realized that they were all about politics. I looked at the multiple source examples that you had given us: New York Times, The Guardian, and Al Jazeera. I also added CNN into the mix of things, but I was really shocked that all of these big newspapers had the same topic. Because to me I would think that if they were competing against each other that they would have different topics they wrote about. They were all talking about the Presidential Elections. I do recognize that I should not of been surprised that they were all the same because at this time of the year mostly what anybody talks and writes about it is the Presidential Elections. I decided to wait a couple of days to see if

Now, to any reader they may or may not agree with what the writer thought about what Justice Antonin Scalia has done in the supreme court that was right. At the beginning I am able to find the writer's stance in the issue of whether to leave Justice Antonin Scalia's seat open or not. As he goes to approach Justice Antonin Scalia’s legacy, the writer is not really clear of their stance. Which is really confusing and I think does not make for a good essay if the reader is confusing. To me it seems like the writer is a Democrat, by their tone of voice and word choice that is used in this piece of the article that discusses where Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat should be filled, “Given how blindly ideological the Republicans in the Senate are, after nearly eight years of doing little besides trying to thwart Mr. Obama…”

The writer was able to acknowledge Justice Antonin Scalia's who has done a lot for this world, but some of the things that the writer did acknowledge might bring bad emotion out of the reader towards Justice Antonin Scalia’s, “He disapproved of the Miranda decision that requires police to read prisoners their rights.” (nytimes.com) As a reader, pathos is a huge thing to me because I think when a writer puts their own emotion into their paper it is easier to get emotion out of the reader and to connect to what they are writing and convince the audience of the argument they are trying to make. I am an optimist and usually when I read something I believe it, but the fact that this was written by the Editorial Board of the New York Times, really applies to the use of ethos and the credibility of the article. They were also able to take life events that have happened in our lives and use it to show that it was something Justice Antonin Scalia’s helped pass and approved of, which has changed lives for the better. That is a fact and even if some hate Justice Antonin Scalia, they do know that from his help some of the laws and freedom we have today we would not. So I do have to say they did a pretty good job of the incorporation of logos into the