A good overview of the administration's view of the issue, but the lack of expert sources, either supporting or opposing that view raises more questions than answers for the reader. Not an example of quality journalism.

This is an excellent summary of the current state of DADT and how it got that way. It was especially effective in tracing the evolution of Powell's view, shaped as it was by public opinion. One weakness of the story was the phrase "Some this week objected to that view" that the military should make the final decision after a year of study. Good journalism doesn't make such generalizations about sources of opinion, unless it's backed up by more than one identified individual.

This is a good overview what who said to whom about what, but it lacks unbiased sources that could help the reader come to their own understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the budget. Without that it's just a collection of opinions coming from individuals looking for support for their own campaigns.

No new insight here into Obama's inability to help Democratic candidates. Simply to claim he could do more, since the party has lost some recent elections, amounts to a cheap shot. The economy and the weakness of the individual candidates were the primary reasons for their defeat. I'd lay much more blame at the feet of the obstructionist blue dog Senators. Had healthcare passed before the August recess, those weak candidates would have had a fighting chance. To expect that Obama ... More »

This a nice summary of the task that lies before Obama in his state of the union address. Nothing particularly new here, but a good overview.

A basic overview of why the drug companies are having second thoughts, but the article lacks sourcing from experts to show whether PhRMA has a legitimate case. Without expert analysis, the story amounts to little more than "they said," "they said."

Interviewing a few desperate people does not a good news story make. In disasters like this one it's always easy to blame the government. The story could have been improved had government officials been interviewed.

This is a very topical story, given the debate over immigration in this country. The writer doesn't include any reference to negative consequences to the U.S. for providing temporary sanctuary to the illegal Haitian immigrants.

There may be a lot of truth in the charges made in this opinion piece, but the lack of source material renders the writer's opinion not much more than a rant.

A good overview of what the challenges are to the administration in its efforts to calm the political storm created by the huge profits banks are making while unemployment stands at 10%.

This article has a bias against gay marriage while posing as a straight news story, It cites the opposition argument first and does not address at all the civil rights argument being advanced by those who brought the lawsuit.

This is an excellent journalistic "catch" of what lies behind the amendment. It lacks balance, of course, and I wish it would have included a response to the criticism, even though retaining the same slant.

A straight news story, the article would be greatly improved with more context. Quotes from those affected by Kazakhstan's chairmanship would have provided that.

Although this is a good overview of the issue of shadowy organizations and their influence on legislation, it falls short of answering the question, so what? If the writer had connected the funding with healthcare reform issues that either have made their way into the bill or not, I'd have given the article an A+.

This article is a bit of a disappointment, given the importance to the reader of learning more about why Yemen is a threat. Sappenfield provides a broad outline of the issues, but not enough detail, like what constitutes the "trappings of a functional government," and why does Yemen "appear to be an eager partner for the U.S."? Why do the Yemenis like us? The few typos also weakens the piece.

This is an excellent analysis of the debate going on with progressives over the healthcare bill. I especially liked Cohn's quote about the public option distracting Republican opponents from other more important issues.

A disappointing column that only brushes the surface of the issue of oil field development in Iraq. With no sources cited and a collection of general personal opinions, it leaves the reader titillated, but unsatisfied with the analysis.

The debate over immigration gets mired in cost/benefit arguments. This is an excellent way of making the issue human.

This is an exceptionally impactful description of global warming and its effects. I wish it had gone further to explain the arguments made by the naysayers and why they're wrong.

This is an excellent overview to explain the issues involved in the climate change debate. The question and answer, with links to more info, is an exellent format for a reader looking for basic information. It could be improved by citing sources that disagree with the general premise that climate warming is attributable to human activity, even if only to knock down that argument.

This is a well-researched discussion of the potential for shale gas to replace coal, but it doesn't go far enough in exploring the negatives of continuing to rely on fossil fuels. Yes, it may get us off coal, but it's also likely to slow down the country's need to develop renewable energy sources. I'm afraid it will simply give politicians another reason for dragging their feet. There's a breathless tone to the story that suggests here's the easy answer we've been looking for to ... More »

Biroonak uses the simplistic approach of taking quotes out of context and spinning them the way he interprets them, which makes his piece fall far short of quality journalism. Obama does not make the claim for winning the war the writer claims. He only said we need to buy time for the Afghan government to survive and protect itself from being overthrown by the Taliban and Al Queda. Quoting the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as if he disagrees with the President is especially ... More »

There are too many anonymous sources to make this story credible. The writers seem to be looking for reasons to report there's evidence of a terrorist plot, when all they can point to is the number of emails exchanged. That's very irresponsible journalism when reporting on an upcoming trial.

An interesting story if you just accept it for what it is, exposing the politics behind the passage of a bill. It could have been improved with more context about which states were eliminated by the 7 year time limit and insight into what the $100 million will pay for. The story's assumption is that it's simply a giveaway to buy a vote--which may be true to a certain extent, but it's also likely Louisiana is facing unique fiscal challenges because of the Katrina disaster.

This is an excellent overview of the arguments on both sides of the debate. A good primer to help viewers understand what will be going on in tonight's fireworks in the Senate.

This is a good update on the link between job creation and green energy initiatives. The only thing missing is citing experts, rather than simply quoting lobbyists and legislative aides.

This is an excellent, and somewhat depressing, overview of the deep pocket lobbyist battles climate change legislation will face.

My question about this topic is why would a school have "careers days" for kindergarteners? It's far too early to motivate them to stay in school to prepare for any career, much less a career in the military. The kid's take away line that "they only kill bad people" is the only acceptable response to the question a kid would naturally ask a soldier, especially from a home that's not fond of the military. I do have MAJOR concerns about the military recruiting in junior high and high ... More »

A powerful summary of the impact of mountain top removal coal mining on the environment and peoples lives. The writing gets a bit hyperbolic, but it's fact-based. The interviews with the people affected are especially good. The article could have been strengthened by citing experts.

An excellent report of what needs to be done, the pushback and how to overcome it if the country has the will and political leaders are courageous enough to pull it off.

A good, basic summary of the dilemma facing international cooperation on climate change, but it doesn't add much to what we already know.

This is an excellent analysis of the claims of both sides of the debate over what caused the Ft. Hood massacre. It's exceptionally well-sourced and balanced.

Not much news in this story, a depressing account of how public interest in something of vital interest to our future well being waxes and wanes with the economy and organized political campaigns refuting the scientific evidence. I don't think international conferences, while important, will sway public interest.

This is a fascinating report about where advertising is going. Reminded me of the way advertisers messed around with our subconscious with images flashed on TV that we don't really see, but influence us. Scary to think of what the power of neuromarketing may do in political campaigns.

This brief report would be greatly improved with additional sourcing. Needed something from an agency that refused to provide information, or at least an attempt by the reporters to get it. It strikes me as an attempt to beat others to the punch with the story, leaving the reader with more questions than answers.

An interesting, yet not a very enlightening, report about temptation as revealed in one study. Would have been strengthened with references to specific findings of other researchers, rather than simply citing "past research."

A very well-written, succinct analysis of why the passage of the bill was historic, yet not dramatic. I especially liked the rebuttal of the Republican complaints about the number of pages in the bill. Always a weak argument, yet one they were fondest of making. Size matters in such legislation, but NOT in the way its opponents claimed.

This eyewitness account is a fascinating read, although it clearly shows the writer's personal bias.

This is quite a good summary of what happened last night, with a minimal slant to either side.

There's not enough information about the study to assess it's validity, nor is there any reporting on what a variety of others think the results mean. It does explain why information alone doesn't change people's minds. I wish it had been deeper into an analysis of why the town hall meetings were such a disaster. The final sentence suggests they wouldn't have had to be.