Lynne Rustad

Founding Member (since December 2006)
Help

About Lynne Help
Last Visit: Jan 19, 2014 - 8:58 AM PST
Last Edit: Jun 18, 2012 - 1:23 PM PDT

This profile can be seen by everyone, including search engines. Help
| Network |

Activity

Show all | Reviews | Posts | Starred | Comments
Lynne reviewed this story - May 9, 2011
Lynne's Rating
3.9
See Full Review » (10 answers)
NT Rating: 3.7 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
3.1

Addresses some legitimate issues but in a rather superficial way. Agree with a previous reviewer that it would have been helpful if writer had educated readers about the beliefs of her denomination (although to what extent she subscribe to them is unclear). There is also a lot of variation among Jews in how they respond to Palin and Israel. Article doesn't convey this adequately and uses a few interview quotes that give a rather distorted picture of the range of attitudes. Hate to tell reviewer Hirsch but Obama's denomination is liberal and mainline, not true of Palin's church. He has apparently bought the right-wing propaganda/

See Full Review » (6 answers)
NT Rating: 3.0 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
1.8

This is poorly sourced, alarmest, and has little information.

See Full Review » (6 answers)
NT Rating: 3.2 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
3.1

While superficially neutral and introducing some research and views from the opposing sides of the debate, this piece gives unwarranted weight to the views of Anand. Although his earlier research on the neonatal pain response was well-respected, his later theories on fetal pain are purely hypothetical; he has developed a new career as the darling of the anti-abortion folks and is well-compensated for his testimony at trial ($450/hour + expenses). This article would have profited from less emotional content and more coverage of research that that raises serious questions about Anan's beliefs.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
NT Rating: 3.8 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
2.6

This is NYT "he said, she said" journalism. Having stated Edwards' position rather fairly on Page 1, on Page 2 Gordon then selectively pull up sources that undermine Edwards' position. He neglects sources that would buttress Edwards' approach and neglects to get a variety of current responses to his plan. This is certainly important news, especially since Edwards reflects the wishes of the majority of Americans but the NYT in reporting in this manner subtly (or not so subtly) sabotages his message. I'm not the only one to point this out (see Hayden http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-hayden/edwards-first-major-candi_b_79202.html).

See Full Review » (7 answers)
NT Rating: 3.6 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
3.6

An incisive, witty, tongue-in-cheek list of deserving award recipients by the founder of media watchdog FAIR. While some might quibble that the list is too short, you can bet that comments here are well-sourced and carefully considered by an author very attentive tot he media.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
NT Rating: 4.1 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
4.2

Juan Cole is one of the most knowledgeable, experienced, and fair experts on the region with access not only to the media but internal sources. Although the post is rather brief, it successfully addresses a number of myths (many of which have been dispensed as administration PR). The establishment media appears unwilling or unable to fact-check these "myths"; instead perpetuating them in sound bites.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
NT Rating: 3.7 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
1.6

Non-story - for which the Times and much of the lazy corporate media is becoming famous. Covering the real issues in the campaign rather than superficials would take some real research and thought.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
NT Rating: 2.4 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
4.4

Calls attention to some of the problems in corporate media reporting on the Democratic primary elections. This is an extremely important issue that has received little attention while potentially having an enormous impact on the elections.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
NT Rating: 3.9 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
4.8

Wasserman is extremely knowledgeable about the voting problems in Ohio and has been a leader in doing research and attempting to bring the issue to the public. Much more has been written by a variety of qualified authors but this is as decent a summary as I've seen of the problems. Brunner, the new SOS has been aggressive in efforts to ensure clean elections. Incidentally, this has little to do with ID's (to prevent voter fraud). There has been no evidence of that. Rather, the problem is keeping people from voting or not recording their actual choice(s).

See Full Review » (7 answers)
NT Rating: 4.0 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
3.9

Glen Greenwald, as usual, gets it right. He has no qualms about calling people to account, whether they're Democrats or Republicans.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
NT Rating: 3.2 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
2.5

This seems to be a "gotcha" type article. Viveca Novak has had some credibility issues herself. While the Biden comments were off the mark - and he should have known better - the other instances cited were making mountains out of molehills and lacking in context. Good grief, take a look at the decay in CPSC figures on the chaart under Republican administrations vs. Clinton. The press has a tendency to nitpick Democratic candidates while allowing Republicans to get away with whoppers. I have serious questions about the neutrality of FactCheck in general.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
NT Rating: 3.3 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
1.8

"Dean" Broder is at it again--playing the wise old man, speculating, citing his anonymous inside-the-Beltway sources to buttress his own opinions and, basically, writing a gossip column. Little here of a substantive nature and he neglects important issues in the campaign (including some icebergs on the GOP side) to focus on his own obsessions.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
NT Rating: 2.5 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
3.7

Although limited in scope to Edwards performance (and his history), found the article to be fair, informative and accurate. Goal clearly wasn't to place it in context of how other candidates did. Press coverage has, by and large been focused on the Obama-Clinton match with a lot of attention given to Clinton and relatively little to other candidates (and a lot of that silly). It's important that other candidates receive a fair hearing. This is a good start.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
NT Rating: 3.4 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
3.0

Sort of a rehash of recent polls showing Americans aren't pleased with Congress, with GOP in worse shape that Dem's. Does give sources for opinions (pollsters). Reasonably fair but doesn't add much to what we already know and speculations about effect are premature.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
NT Rating: 2.4 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
2.2

This is an opinion piece, not a fact-based report, lacks sources, and is inaccurate in some particulars (e.g., Romney is distancing himself from the MA plan - which isn't working well - and Clinton's plan has subsequently been released). It is one particular view of how history has influenced health care and essentially makes a conservative argument against single-payer, saying that people should (and want to) take care of themselves -while ignoring the problem of health care disparity in the US.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
NT Rating: 2.6 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
2.5

This is an opinion piece and below Klein's usual standards. He gives Edward's credit for pushing the health care issue and Hillary kudos for a "good" plan - without looking at the details of any of the plans or the indications that the one Clinton's is selling is a gift to insurance companies and Big Pharma.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
NT Rating: 2.5 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
4.5

This is a decent and somewhat amusing overview of the problems faced in health care reform and public attitudes toward it. Summarizes (fairly I think) some pro's and con's of Clinton's approach and how her proposal is likely to be met by the right and left. Author is honest (a nice thing to see) about her own preference for single-payer coverage (a bias I share).

See Full Review » (7 answers)
NT Rating: 3.0 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
4.2

A fair look at troop morale, presenting the good and the bad as well as recent polls and statistics. Anecdotes provide context. I find some of the prior reviews very biased.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
NT Rating: 2.6 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
1.8

This is not a "story" or fact-based reporting. It is OPINION. The authors are centrist hawks at the Brookings Institute and the editorial must be viewed in that context. The authors have been wrong about the war at each stage and there is no reason to assume they have credibility this time. Cherry-picking signs of progress appears to be part of the hawks' agenda to keep the war going.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
NT Rating: 3.3 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne reviewed this story - Oct 1, 2008
Lynne's Rating
4.7

This is excellent well-sourced coverage of an episode in congressional history of which many should be ashamed. CBS does a public service in bringing some of the details of drug lobbyists influence on congress to a wider public - a major contributor to spiraling health care costs.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
NT Rating: 4.1 | See All NT Reviews »
Lynne posted this story - Feb 10, 2008
Lynne posted this story - Jan 2, 2008
(Beta)

Levels & Stats

Member LevelHelp
2.7 avg.
2.7 avg.
Activity
3.3 avg.
Experience
1.0 avg.
Ratings
3.4 avg.
Transparency
1.0 avg.
Validation
3.0 avg.

StatsHelp
Reviews
21
Answers
175
Comments
0
Ratings Received
11
Number of Raters
9
Ratings Given
9

Lynne's Widget

Add this widget to your site »