Insight into a Rick Perry's follower writing

The Blog entry, “Insiders are wrong: Rick Perry won't be the first to drop out” (August 18, 2015), discusses Rick Perry’s presidential campaign previous to his drop out of it. The Bloggers intended audience are Rick Perry’s followers; I assume, conservative Republicans. The credibility of this entry is non-existent, since there is no evidence to back up the author’s claims. The author simply makes assumptions about the political actions of Rick Perry, such as; “Rick Perry running for president in 2016 is quixotic.” and “… if you’re Rick Perry then you stay the course through Iowa.” The argument the blogger makes is literally the title of the entry. The entry contains some non-substantial evidence, which seems very biased, therefore it is hard to take the writer seriously. The author’s logic implies that, Rick Perry was very unlikely to win the 2016 presidential elections, but he will not drop out of the race. One way for Perry to succeed according to the author is to “Focus on farmers and veterans and hope you’re under the radar enough that they don’t target you for not supporting ethanol subsidies. Spend all your  money in Iowa and see if you can make a go of it.” Currently, Rick perry is not running for president, as he dropped out of the presidential race on September 11 of this year, just shy of a month after this blog entry. There’s no one left to agree with the author, after the irony. Regardless, had Rick Perry not suspended his campaign for presidency, I could not agree with the author on this entry, since it is extremely biased. It seems that the author is only hoping about what he is writing, instead of actually backing up his claims. 

Texas ban on texting while driving. Does it matter?

The editorial discusses the absent ban on texting while driving in Texas. In this article all Texans are the main audience, this becomes very clear at the end of the editorial where a “Make your voice heard” section is included. There is sufficient evidence to back up this article, making it credible, for example; “The Texas Medical Association reported to lawmakers that 95,000 crashes and 460 deaths were attributed to distracted driving in Texas in 2013.” The argument in this article is largely made against Rick Perry, who vetoed a 2011 texting while driving bill. The writer argues that even if the bill would “micromanage the behavior of adults” (Rick Perry), Texans would follow the law just like when we started buckling up. Even though I agree with a bill passing regarding this issue, I’ve had the opportunity to see a law against texting while driving implemented at a more local level. While texting and driving is illegal in Austin, I am perplexed at how many Austinites completely ignore the law. It seems as though this law was never implemented. Maybe, it does not possess as harsh of penalties as it should. The article states “texting while driving has become a bigger hazard than drinking and driving” and it backs it up with a fact: “11 teenagers die every day because they can’t break their electronic addictions in the car.” 

If this problem kills as many people as the data claims, maybe the penalties shouldn’t seem so extenuating.

Source:  It’s absurd that Texas doesn’t ban texting while driving