As noted here…
…Bruni tailed (George W.) Bush obsessively on the campaign trail (in 2000), filing more than 200 dispatches. But he never once referenced in print the Globe allegations (of a one-year gap in Dubya’s National Guard service). (Just try to imagine the Times' reaction if, during the 2000 campaign, the same Boston Globe had reported on Page One that Gore's discharge papers from Vietnam showed he rigged his wartime duty and orchestrated an early exit by simply refusing to report for duty during the final two years of his commitment.)And as noted here, Bruni complained about a “date night” for the Obamas in 2009.
So Frank Bruni will be the next political pundit for the Times.
I assume, then, that Andrew Malcolm was unavailable.
And while I’m on the subject of media idiocy, allow me to point out that Mark Hemingway of The Weakly Standard is alleging some of that dreaded liberal bias from The Washington Post; see, the paper just debuted a blog on think tanks, and the person running the blog is named Allen McDuffee (here)…
From the Post bio…(McDuffee) is a New York-based politics writer. Part reporter, part investigative journalist, part blogger, Allen has written for The Nation, Huffington Post, AlterNet, Raw Story, New York Observer, In These Times and Truthdig, among others.So, then, what does this alleged left-wing commie hippie blogger come up with in one of his first posts? A collection of links to the following: an L.A. Times opinion column by The Doughy Pantload telling Paul Ryan to run for president, three links to columns in the National Review, two to the New York Post, and one to the American Enterprise Institute.
Emphasis added. The Nation? AlterNet? Raw Story? Truth Dig? Those are decidedly left-wing outlets. Can you imagine the post hiring anyone from, say, World Net Daily? Because that's about the right-wing equivalent of some of those publications.
The phony umbrage act is really, really old at this point, wingnuts (and I’ll ignore Hemingway’s typically childish slam at the four worthy news sources he mentioned for now).
To the Editor:(Note: The reason I didn’t include the last paragraph of Camp’s letter is because I’m tired of getting zinged by people who complain that I use all of their content for my own nefarious schemes as far as they’re concerned – and yes, I realize that I could easily be running afoul of someone else’s legal protection, regardless of the fact that I’m not earning one dime for their labors.)
“Going Back on the Deal” (editorial, May 16) concludes that “there are better ways” to help the unemployed than the Jobs Act, and that changes to the unemployment program go back on a December deal between the administration and Congress.
The only thing the Jobs Act “goes back on” is the tired notion that more Washington spending is the only way to help the unemployed.
Washington, May 17, 2011
Basically, Camp is all in a huff because the Times dared to criticize his scheme to use unemployment funds to reduce business taxes at a time when the national rate is 9 percent. This is perfectly typical for Camp, who once claimed that a reduction in spending decreased unemployment after World War II here (actually, unemployment increased slightly, and at that time, both major political parties pretty much subscribed to Keynesian economics, meaning that government spending was the best form of stimulus…so, today’s “pain caucus” wing of the pundit class is wrong on U.S. history, among many other things).
Also, as noted here, Camp voted to protect outsourcing, voted about a year ago here against extending unemployment benefits, and claimed incorrectly here that money in the “stim” was earmarked for ACORN, which of course is now defunct.
And as far as I’m concerned, Camp is yet another Republican politician who gives Roman Catholics a bad name.
Millions of North Koreans face horrible deprivation, not only of food but also of heat, light and freedom. Before sending another dime's worth of food to North Korea, why shouldn't the Obama administration sum up the real problem, with budget estimates attached -- and let Radio Free Asia and its cohorts broadcast that illuminating information into North Korea?As noted here…
On July 13, President Barack Obama signed into law a legislation that provides permanent authorization to Radio Free Asia…Also, this tells us about the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Korea, which is trying to put into place “Ten Practical and Specific Measures for Advancing Human Rights in United States Policy toward North Korea.”
This is good news to the Tibetan service of RFA. Prior to this bill, the authorization for funding Radio Free Asia would not have been available after September 30, 2010.
Could the Obama Administration do more on this issue? I’m sure the answer is yes, but I’m also sure you could say that about every one of his predecessors in office (and you’ll probably be able to say that about his successors also).
Besides, the measure I use when it comes to North Korea is whether or not they’ve been firing off any missiles lately or making threats involving nuclear material, and since matters have been quiet on that front and hopefully will remain that way, I’m inclined to give the Obama Administration some credit (which Rosett and her ilk are loathe to do, of course, claiming here that Obama should have pretty much just kept his mouth shut about bin Laden…uh huh; imagine what Obama’s predecessor would have done – he would be enshrined in corporate media lore forever).
Oh, and as noted here, Rosett also demeaned the very serious story of the 2007 World Toilet Summit.
(I’ll have to “leave it there,” people – as I said, this is a serious issue, but still, I’m sure you can come up with a scatological reference for Rosett here at least as well as I can.)