ARCS 1 and 3

1.)From here.
This article is talking about jobs being cut because employers are scared about the recession. It doesn't really seem to have a "side" on the issue, but is stating the facts. I see this first question as needing to look at an article that has a "side", particularly one that is knocking someone or something's policies - and I guess you could take it from that standpoint, but I'm not sure. You could say that WP is saying employers need to not cut the jobs so that people don't lose their jobs so that the economy will not be as unstable because people won't be as scared because they will still have their job. In all honestly I do not see a "deductive argument" anywhere in this article, unless it may be in the fact that people who are willing to work extra hours to keep their job should be able to keep it, even if they are taking a pay cut. I don't really see how any credible media source would have a deductive argument, if their main goal is to be non-partisan.

3.)'Elvis has left the building' implies that
Premises:
-Elvis is famous
-Elvis enjoys his privacy
-Elvis was in the building
-Elvis is trying to get away from crazy people like you
-Elvis does not enjoy being attacked by fans
-Elvis was never going to stay in the building very long