I am interested in joining News Trust because "niche news" has made "preaching to the choir" a problematic element in our society. I like huffpost and would like to help it function in a useful way.
Ms Goodman is on the scene in an area the UN says it cannot deliver aid to for "security" reasons - yet the news crew from Democracy Now has encountered no problems, in spite of the almost complete lack of food and water for a week. Like Katrina, the aid comes late, looting begins out of desperation, and people are then blamed. Congratulations to Ms Goodman for bringing this aid syndrome to light.
it is a press release from a very reliable source involved in trying to uphold journalistic values - opinion and press release, based on facts
major problem with this article is that it ignores Michele Bachman's assertion that she believes the birthers, even as she pretends she does not. Observe the double negative in her reply when Larry King questions her closely. Good political drama, but it leaves the last act unfinished!
The author makes a point, and consults with an expert about the point - good support. It is opinion, but makes a point and supports it.
This is rant, not journalism. The focus is not on the issues, but rather on Democrats, who though admittedly not very smart politically, are nowhere near as stupid as the Republicans appear to be with regard to policy.
This does explain some of the republican talking points without a diatribe against Obama. It sidesteps the public option in the health exchanges...disingenuously.
If this is true, why have we not heard more about adding the public option in again in conference? Is there any guarantee that the public option would end up in the bill if the baucus is chosen over the help proposal. I don't think the author makes in clear how this would work.
It touches on key elements that are often overlooked in the health care debate: bad health fuels healthcare profits. The incentives need changing and this medical opinion piece highlights key issues.
In the case of Fox, I am always concerned that an underlying item m ay be being represented. However, this did cite opposing sides, and did not make a side look bad. Hopefully, its true.
merely quotes Enzi. Does not provide enough sources to verify truth. . . to be fair, a common problem
i'm not sure. at the rate facts are twisted, I would have to verify them on the ground to know. i see this exercise as the blind leading the blind, more or less.
It is quality opinion. Mr. Krugman takes a strong stance but he backs it up with historical events and his perceptions of controversies in the past.
