Hari makes some obvious points about corporations owning politics, but this point is worth repeating and he provides two egregious examples to demonstrate this: Due to corporate pressure, Congress can't pass a law banning corporations from receiving government contracts if they prevent their employees from taking rapists to court, nor can it pass a law banning corporations from selling items made with slave labor. Disgusting.

Another round table on the "problem of education" without the presence of experts on learning. As a math/science teacher I find this type of article depressing and way too commonplace. The three "experts" consist of the Chancellor of NYC public schools, a political post controlled by the Mayor, a university president (typically a public relations / fund raising job) and a law school dean. The consensus approach here is pro-business, anti-union and pro-charter, with no justification ... More »

The teaser: "Fox News isn't just bad. It's un-American." Point is not proven, but the piece isn't crap. The news organization it reviews (Fox News) is thoroughly full of crap, well-documented with several examples. But this doesn't imply that it is anti-American. Yellow journalism may or may not be an American invention, but Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch are certainly following in a sordid, very American, tradition. I think Weisberg is overreaching here. But just because there's ... More »

This piece is not crap. Its point is stated in the title - many people die early due to unavailability of universal health care. It refers to "a Harvard University study ... which appears in the American Journal of Public Health" and to a previous finding from the Institute of Medicine which provide documentation for the claim. The referenced study was easy to Google - here is the link: http://www.pnhp.org/excessdeaths/health-insurance-and-mortality-in-US-adults.pdf The author, a ... More »

My crap detector went off, big time. The premise of this opinion piece is that mainstream media is being too lenient on Obama and too harsh on his critics. Huntley's main fault is laziness. He makes assertion upon assertion but fails to provide documentation. For example, about Rush Limbaugh: "He was smeared on CNN and MSNBC with false accusations of making two racist comments." Maybe so, maybe not. But you won't find those comments here, nor any refutations. What a load of crap.

Op-Ed piece noteworthy not so much for what it says but for where it is published (New York Times). There are many criticisms of President Obama from the left in places like CounterPunch, Alternet, Huffington Post and Common Dreams, but the gatekeeper press (New York Times, Washington Post, etc.) rarely countenance discourse from out of their self-imposed mainstream, which ranges from the far right to the moderate center, and which focuses on people like David Broder who are embedded ... More »

I rated this story 5s almost across the board, because it is a very comprehensive mainstream analysis of how economists missed predicting the financial crisis. It's excellent - as far as it goes - but it misses some crucial real-world points. The most obvious one is that the experts involved are not disinterested observers - they have a career stake (and in many cases a financial one) in perpetuating the system. Another point is critical voices - and there were plenty - were ... More »

A new one for News Trust - video satire. Maybe Jon Stewart is a journalist after all. He is certainly not afraid to call a lie by its true name, and use video for backup. He is great at pointing out the hypocracy of those on the right wing.

The best thing about this piece is the point that Social Security and Medicare (aka "public option") are hardly considered controversial, especially by the tens of millions of people who depend on it. The silliest part is the argument in favor of a "trigger" so the government option won't be implemented until the insurance companies misbehave. Huh? How long are we supposed to wait?

This is a piece of evidence-free Iranophobic hype. Imagine the reaction if someone had written this piece about Israel. There is no evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapons program or is capable of enriching Uranium to the level needed for a fission bomb. The U.S. intelligence community came to this conclusion last year, which was very inconvenient for people like Uri Dromi, who seem fixated on a desire to start a war with Iran.

This is a disturbing article which documents how the systemic corruption of corporate money has - legally - bought Dick Gephardt's soul, or what is left of it.

One reviewer complains that no experts are cited in this piece. What expert would one need to consult on the advisability of avoiding yet another war in the Middle East, the first with a functioning army? Why does it need an expert (although plenty are available) to say that bombing Iran's nuclear enrichment plants would be the height of stupidity? Why would anyone wish for talks between the U.S. and Iran NOT to be fruitful, as they have been even after a single session?

This is a pundit piece, not a news article, so it is held to a lower standard, which it fails to meet. Diehl's point, having bought the administration line about Iran's supposed imminent threat to manufacture nuclear weapons (despite denails by a US intelligence assessment last year, and complete lack of evidence), is that sanctions, a military attack, and destabilizing the Iran government by backing the opposition won't work because Russia and China stand in the way, "buying the ... More »

A description of the right-wing rally in Washington DC on 9/12. Interesting interviews with people involved. But no enterprising journalism here. I am still curious about how the rally was organized. Tens of thousands of people don't just show up at the Capitol without lots of prior organization. There is a widespread cynicism and anger - left and right - about people losing their power. But it's scary when the most viable "leader" described in this piece is the racist Glen Beck.

Interesting piece based on interview with a member of LEAP (law enforcement against prohibition) who speaks in favor of legalization of drugs with government regulation. The allegation is most of the murders in the U.S. are drug related and most prison cost and about 1/3 of law enforcement cost are directly related to illegal drugs. Take the money out of it by legalizing drugs and the gangs go away (or at least do something else) and violence diminishes, as well as expenses. Idea is ... More »

Common sense op-ed piece which reminds us what the doctrinaire "gummint can't do nothin' right" folks would like us to forget - that in areas such as firefighting, public safety, postal service, education, libraries - and health care - the government has a far better track record than private industry. There are a whole bunch of others that could be added - environmental protection, roads, setting and enforcing health/safety standards, national defense just for starters. Add ... More »

Excellent story on the immersion model of bilingual education, where ALL students learn both Spanish and English continuously for many years, until they are fluent in both languages. Courses are taught in both languages. What a refreshing idea! The politics of multilingual education are also discussed - there are political forces at work to minimize bilingual education requirements, with the result that Spanish speakers are exited into English-speaking academic classes before they ... More »

An important story which documents improper negotiations between the administration and big drug companies and holds Obama accountable for unconscionable dealmaking, behind the back of the American public and his allies in Congress. To get substantial health care reform, Obama needs to build up popular support, not sell it off to the drug companies.

Very superficial view of health coops presented by NPR as an alternative to the "public option" - a large public health care provider to compete with large health providers and insurance companies. Interviews a customer and one or two people who work for a Minnesota coop. In the spirit of "balanced reporting" NPR presents a Republican's viewpoint and a free-market opponent. No point at all from the 60% of Americans who want viable public provided health care. The elephant in the ... More »

Interesting notes on an illegal alien's positive experiences with Britain's public health service. P.S. He eventually became a legal resident and works as a journalist. Pieces like this are interesting reflections on what it might be like to experience the system, but a reliance on anecdotes doesn't say how well the system works.

Raises important questions about whether public sponsored health care (in Canada) makes people wait too long for necessary care. Some cherry-picking (anecdotes) and some relying on experts.

Important news story about a seed company (Monsanto) which was successfully sued to prevent distribution of GM alfalfa seed, pending official environmental review. Both the U.S. government and the huge multinational were fighting this requirement. I don't know of any other successful major challenges to GM crops in the U.S.

Pro-business editorial is inherently biased, bashing national health care with two arguments. This is OK for what it is, but I wouldn't call it good journalism. Its claims regarding Canada's poor health resources are deceptive and dishonest. The assertion that infant mortality is defined differently in the U.S. and in other countries is taken word-for-word from a partisan's blog, and their statistics are unsourced and contradicted by WHO data.

The comments are even more interesting than the blog posting itself. Oehmke presents standard statistics (twice as much spent proportionately on health care as other advanced countries with worse results). Presents the argument that a well-run public system is the only system with enough clout to impact and hence "compete with" the insurance companies.

Very short interview with a professor of health economy, who is familiar with health care systems around the world. What makes this notable is a major US news magazine is publishing an authoritative, easily digestible article which promotes a single universal plan: "We need to have one basic, standard package that is respectable." It isnt really all that difficult to understand.

A review of the latest Nixon tape transcripts just released. It's good to be reminded of what a thoroughly nasty person he was. Thank you, Christopher Hitchens.

Interesting short commentary by emeritus professor of health policy. He explicitly addresses political realities (likelihood of weighing down a plan with tons of goodies for established players) and practical necessities (a minimum of catastrophic coverage for everyone, and necessity for containing cost increases).

Interesting take on health care debate by past chief of Congressional Budget Office. Like lots of "policy wonks" he would like to depoliticize the discussion - not possible in the real world. Ignores the elephant in the room - the political power of health care / insurance lobbies.

Opinion piece - analysis of why Democrats in the House and Senate, and Obama, are reluctant to pursue a strong public option. It's not all that complicated - financial interests (insurance companies) are a more key Democratic constituency than the people our elected officials nominally represent.

Interesting story about application of human psychology (irrationality) to economics, in particular, financial bubbles. Herd behavior amplifies the psychology-driven decisions of individual investors to affect the entire system. However, the article ignores simple explanations for market chaos, such as the very clear connection of socializing the risks for the players considered "too big to fail." It's clear to me, a non-economist, that I'm being rational when I have others pay for ... More »

An opinion piece on a piece of punditry. Noteworthy because it highlights conservative pro-corporate Will's complaint that it ain't fair for the non-profit government to compete with for-profit insurance companies. Will is a porpogandist. I don't know if Silver is a pundit (an opinion on everything, an expert on nothing), but at least he presents an argument from economics which explains why the insurance industry is by nature non-competitive. Interesting piece.

Article in Portland Oregonian about harvesting biomass from National Forests as a jobs program to keep mills running after they have run out of cheap trees to cut. Promoted by Oregon Forest Industries Council which is an apologist for logging public lands in any guise. Mostly industry folks and politicians are quoted but one environmentalist is quoted. Sounds like a logging program to me. Some of the posted comments are interesting.

Poor summary of public views on health care reform, based on a set of three polls. CQ articles on each poll are referenced, but the polls themselves are not, so it isn't possible to find out the questions that were asked. Very superficial and not recommended.

A review of the case of Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, who is being held indefinitely in military detention in the U.S. for allegedly being a combatant in the "war on terror." Good journalism - factual, gives enough well-sourced details for the reader to become informed, and presents an interesting dilemma for President O. One possibility is a scenario whereby a new type of kangaroo court is created, allowing a non-defendent to be preventatively detained, I suppose for life.

This piece is an advertisement for the Republican Party House whip, Rep. Eric Cantor. The article touts the similarities between him and Newt Gingrich, but without reminding us that Newt was the father of the ultra-partisanship which has prevailed since then, mostly by the Republicans. Don't waste your time on this piece unless you are a Republican partisan and need cheering up.

Interesting article which examines a national success story. A fascinating piece deals with national education reform that * actually worked * - I am hungry for more details. No serious analysis of how to use the lessons of Finland in the U.S.

Interesting point-of-view piece about educational interventions that have been shown to work with minority kids. Many of them seem to attack the effect of being submerged in a dominant culture. The article makes a plea for directing stimulus money at programs which have been shown to work, rather than scattered.

This is a very annoying article, the point of which is school districts should recruit based on their salary / benefits package. Then it goes on to show that in a wealthy district of suburban DC, teachers can do quite well financially. Very deceptive and not exactly a scientific random sample. The author needs to realize that quality isn't always measured in dollars. For a different take on life, look up the incredibly productive inventor Stanford Ovshinsky,

Blah journalism about politicians' reactions to a Minnesota initiative to implement "merit based" pay increases for teachers. The article mentions that there is no data to support the program's effectiveness other than the perception that staff feel it has improved professional development. The article is seriously compromised by not including the views of knowledgable education experts on the pros and cons of merit-based pay.

An interesting piece about a possible labor war in DC between the teachers and the chancellor. One problem for the article is that the union's proposed contract hasn't been released yet, and the chancellor's desires aren't concrete, so the article deals with speculation and generalities - background information.