JJ Roussean via Marx view that property is evil and this evil motivates repressive governments like our own. Uses killings at Kent State as first proof for thesis and goes on. No mention that these events not result of evil conspiracy but stark failure of leadership all too common throughout human history.
Guns are evil and they kill people. This article is a peaen to gun control yet neglects to mention that these mass killings almost all occur in gun free zones--schools, offices and other public buildings. It even fails to mention that security personnel at Va Tech were also unarmed.
Almost blatant story proving meme that evil big pharma and doctors are making megabucks medically mistreating their patients. Nor is their any mention of the role federal regulation and malpractice premiums play in all medical treatment decisions. Attemps to support hypothesis by reference to "European" usage levels of drugs covered in this article. Yet there is no mention that these socialized medicine countries practice their own form of rationing, often dening best care to the elderly or most seriously ill as not being "cost effective."
The famous "Research shows" appears in last graf to bolster support for mandatory donation. Neither those interviewed nor those doing the apparently thought to ask why the government owns the parts of free people and why free people can not privately contract for organ donation.
Typical NPR reporting--one sided. The Poles are descrived as "rolled over" to support missle defense. This defense is very expensive, not perfect and upsets the Russians' "missle concerns" whatever that means. Clearly more polemic than fact. Concludes with meme that Pentagon always lies. Rubbish.
All these funding stories are too much PR to convince public that something is happening. Bu that something never includes reporting on the consequences for US national interest if funding for Iraq is cut. Is US departure free of all consequences? And no reporter asks this question of those who now state their patience is running out.
Typcial NYT hit piece. Tells its readers what to think; does not link to original sources lest reader form own opinion. But as this is an opinion piece, one has low expectations anyway. This article does not disappoint these expectations.
Well done eyewitness account of events on and prior to election by observer and writer living in Paris
Wow, this is great reporting. It's straight forward and unadorned thus the events come through for the reader to assemble into a meaningful whole. Of course, since the writer is embedded with only one side in this conflict, I guess one could argue bias. But so what. The opponents here have Mickey Mouse for their version.
