Our morning paper, The Midland Reporter-Telegram (mrt.com) likes to provide its readers with editorials from other newspapers, and one of their favorite sources is the Houston Chronicle. Last week they gave us editorials from there two days in a row.
The first one was titled "The threat posed by drug cartels along border could be hype." (It was titled Border Splurge at Chron.com.) And it decried the Texas government allocating $86.1 million for border security to protect Texans from drug cartels. Fear of drug cartels is misguided, because "there is no evidence there is a spill-over of violent crimes," an expert says. But they let this slip out:
To date, Texas taxpayers have spent more than $800 million on beefed-up security even though it is supposed to be a federal role, as reported by Chronicle reporter Mike Ward.
So expenditures for security are up, and crime is down. Let's play cause and effect. Spending more for security is supposed to get the crime down.
But all is not perfect along the border. For example, see Cartel Bosses Run Mexican Empires from Safe Houses in Texas.
Back to the editorial under examination. One of their complaints is that the phrase "drug cartel" is outdated and is no longer used by experts. That brings us to the morning paper's editorial the very next day. See it on the right.
The title of that one was "US has opportunities to help our neighbor to the south, as well as ourselves." That was the subhead at Chron.com where the top line title was Editorial: Mexico's dark days, and it was about the case of the 43 students who went missing recently in the state of Guerrero, Mexico, and who are presumed dead.
The word "cartel" appeared four times. Since experts don't use that term then Chron.com editors are obviously not experts.
Editors note: Why do you keep picking on the local newspaper? Robo-ed. -- I just spent $208 for another year's worth of that stuff. I've earned the privilege. But in all sincerity, while newspapers are in decline, I really do hope the best for them. Sleepless.