After reading Jeffrey Sach's "The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Times" an article like this suplements Mr. Sach's perspective. I can say with an element of certainty that this article does a good job of presenting an overview of the problem. It does fall short of providing the hope that is for people who can pressure their government to provide what they have committed for helping poor countries succeed.

This is good journalism because the writer chose a little different emphasis than writers for other publications that wrote about the same story.

It is not good journalism because it offers only two sources: the writer's and Tenet's. It is inconsistent with the wide body of evidence I've accumulated in my mind from reading many sources. It is inconceivable that no credible source has made the case that there was a significant connection between al-Qa'ida before this screed was published and the possibility that it is believable.

It has a lot of information; but it falls short in backing up many of its premises. The one that comes to mind is whether people actually have to line up in Canada for health care as they do for a movie in this country. These accusations sound like sound bites; and sound bites usually lack substance. As far as the impact of Michael Moore's other movies: what is the basis for the writer's judgement that they lacked impact? Deciding to ban guns would have been an extreme reaction to ... More »

Yes, this is good journalism because it exposes the bias of some of the main stream media outlets in detail. It has made me much more aware of how unreliable the New York Times is and how I have to be skeptical of everything I read in it. I am sad to see the same failings in the Washington Post which I thought, up to now, was a reliable newspaper.

I believe it is good journalism because it asks some key questions that need to be answered before we engage in another military adventure.

It is good journalism because it explores the many facets of the forces emanating from e-journalism.

It is good journalism because it presents a well articulated logic.

It is good journalism because it draws on many sources and presents the sources with their relative weights graded.

This is a very well balanced story that includes several perspectives about the potential to reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It includes opponents from at least two different companies who have alternative ideas.

The story didn't really give Rice any chance to respond to the allegations after her initial comments. I was looking for her response and I did not see it. As much as I would like to believe all this I consider it pretty much an opinion piece; and I've long ago learned to take opinion pieces as light on documentation.

It is good journalism because it presents a new perspective that changes some notions about the effects of layoffs on profits. It is extremely good news that, if it is absorbed by corporate America could have an excellent effect on the overall employment picture.

It is good as far as it goes. There is room for skepticism, however. As always when results of any action are analyzed there is a tendency to say the results were intended. That borders on cynicism. It is also, if it isn’t entered as a possibility, conjecture and opinion. That element is missing here; and that is good.

This is a good article in that it exposes several areas that need attention by the lawmakers. I would hope they would close loop-holes that seem to allow personal e-mail accounts on government computers. I agree that the messages probably aren't lost. To say that they are would expose incredible incompetence by users. Nobody should ever send an e-mail without keeping a copy of it. Otherwise there is no difference between e-mail and verbal transmissions, the later is lost unless it is recorded.

It does a good job of making a point about Mr. Imus' lack of credibility when he says he is sorry. Is it possible for someone who is "spanked" to truly reform? Yes, but not likely. Change comes from within; not from being chastised. I don’t mean that he should not be chastised; he certainly should. And the immense amount of publicity is certainly appropriate. However, like the man in the movie "Groundhog Day", unless he truly sees the error in his ways will he change the outcome of ... More »

Viewing and reading three (3) independant sources that I have come to trust I believe this story is incredibly short sighted. It takes a hurricane expert who is only saying that increased average temperature doesn't influence hurricanes, and expands as if he says global warming is bogus.

It reveals facts rather than conjecture or opinion.

I would have liked to have seen more of what was actually discussed. Specific responses to answers would have made this article more informative and worthwhile.

The story certainly brings out the effets of polution that hasn't been widely written about before. As these kinds of articles are published doubters will be influenced unless they are hard-core.

While it includes most of the issues I would bring to the argument, it leaves me room for thought; that is, it is thought provoking. Now, I give a lot of columnists with whom I disagree a "thought provoking" quality; but in this case I agree with everything the author says. I only would add the thought that Adlai Stevenson's second try at the presidency should be a lesson to anyone considering trying it. In our state (Washington) the new head of the state Republican party is ... More »

Comment about article in Free Inquiry the Secular Humanist Bulletin. I believe this is good journalism because it inspires me to broaden my perspective about the conflict between religion and atheism to include the ideas of secularism. I have a different idea about the idea of a God. I believe "God" is an abstraction. That is "God" is an idea like "good". To say God is or is not a real person is a non-question. For those who say they believe in God to ascribe a personification to ... More »