“Cash and fetal”

[yeahwho]

NYTimes columnist Thomas L. Friedman (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/opinion/01friedman.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin) once again helps me understand why this current economical crisis and the "Bailout" is so important,

I was channel surfing on Monday, following the stock market’s nearly 800-point collapse, when a commentator on CNBC caught my attention. He was being asked to give advice to viewers as to what were the best positions to be in to ride out the market storm. Without missing a beat, he answered: “Cash and fetal.”

I’m in both — because I know an unprecedented moment when I see one. I’ve been frightened for my country only a few times in my life: In 1962, when, even as a boy of 9, I followed the tension of the Cuban missile crisis; in 1963, with the assassination of J.F.K.; on Sept. 11, 2001; and on Monday, when the House Republicans brought down the bipartisan rescue package.

But this moment is the scariest of all for me because the previous three were all driven by real or potential attacks on the U.S. system by outsiders. This time, we are doing it to ourselves. This time, it’s our own failure to regulate our own financial system and to legislate the proper remedy that is doing us in.

And earlier this morning I was reading something that would seriously hit home for all of us, the insurance companies are next. That means the end to any protection whatsoever. This is sobering in a " your going to be affected" way. No way is anyone coming out of this "bailout" unscathed. It's just beginning.

[travesty]

Gotta love the NY Times for lefty slants. I love how everyone in the media seems to forget that 40% of Democrats (93 of them) voted against it (including 5 Democrat House Committee Chairs) but yet somehow "the House Republicans brought down the bipartisan rescue package".

This shitty package was brought down by EVERYONE who had a brain. Blaming one side or the other is pointless AND unfounded.

[yeahwho]

Gotta love the NY Times for lefty slants. I love how everyone in the media seems to forget that 40% of Democrats (93 of them) voted against it (including 5 Democrat House Committee Chairs) but yet somehow "the House Republicans brought down the bipartisan rescue package".

This shitty package was brought down by EVERYONE who had a brain. Blaming one side or the other is pointless AND unfounded.

There are options,

Friends,

The richest 400 Americans -- that's right, just four hundred people -- own MORE than the bottom 150 million Americans combined. 400 rich Americans have got more stashed away than half the entire country! Their combined net worth is $1.6 trillion. During the eight years of the Bush Administration, their wealth has increased by nearly $700 billion -- the same amount that they are now demanding we give to them for the "bailout." Why don't they just spend the money they made under Bush to bail themselves out? They'd still have nearly a trillion dollars left over to spread amongst themselves!

Of course, they are not going to do that -- at least not voluntarily. George W. Bush was handed a $127 billion surplus when Bill Clinton left office. Because that money was OUR money and not his, he did what the rich prefer to do -- spend it and never look back. Now we have a $9.5 trillion debt. Why on earth would we even think of giving these robber barons any more of our money?

Michael Moore Here's How to Fix the Wall Street Mess (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?id=237)
Wednesday, October 1st, 2008

[travesty]

I may totally agree with him but I wouldn't know because just today I swore I wouldn't read any more of that fucking idiot's garbage. Sorry.

[yeahwho]

I may totally agree with him but I wouldn't know because just today I swore I wouldn't read any more of that fucking idiot's garbage. Sorry.

Funny how options open when the shit hits the fan. I'm finding myself reading every angle on this historic raping we're about to endure.

[travesty]

Yeah me too. But the Moore thing in my Great Day to be Amrican thread sent me over the top with him. I have a feeling that our collective ass is already bleeding and we haven't even felt out pants go down yet.:eek:

[yeahwho]

Gotta love the NY Times for lefty slants.

I have to take exception to this statement, the NYTimes is always accused of being some sort of lefty newspaper yet they pretty much have gone straight down the republican line of thinking right up until 2007. Even to go as far as trying to charge money for editorial content via the failed "Times Select" option.

Outside of not wincing on Gay marriage the NYTimes is about as liberal as the GE and GMC ads that grace full pages of the publication daily.

It's a mainstream news source and just about the most defining source of mainstream media a dictionary could define. It's slightly left by the smallest degree of the Wall Street Journal, which may as well be called the CIA daily.

Both have some of the best writers in America today, that doesn't mean I agree with what they write, but I cannot disagree with good writing. That is how come millions read these papers daily.

[travesty]

It's slightly left by the smallest degree

Well, that's not what they have to say about themselves.....
From the Inside (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D01E7D8173DF936A15754C0A9629C8B 63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1)

Both have some of the best writers in America today, that doesn't mean I agree with what they write, but I cannot disagree with good writing. That is how come millions read these papers daily.

Jayson Blair....period.

[yeahwho]

Well, that's not what they have to say about themselves.....
From the Inside (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D01E7D8173DF936A15754C0A9629C8B 63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1)
Jayson Blair....period.

If your taking an occasional gander at the NYTimes and that is what your considering to be a "lefty rag" I'm sort of surprised at how conservative you are.

I'm mean really, is that as far to the left as you go?

[travesty]

No I go all the way to the Huffington Post and MSNBC:) of which you will see me cite every so often. Don't get me wrong, I think the NY Times does a somewhat decent job but there is no denying the obvious bias, especially in the article you posted, which is what I was commenting on in the first place.

[yeahwho]

No I go all the way to the Huffington Post and MSNBC:) of which you will see me cite every so often. Don't get me wrong, I think the NY Times does a somewhat decent job but there is no denying the obvious bias, especially in the article you posted, which is what I was commenting on in the first place.

Sure, sounds good. I usually never use Slate or Common Dreams as a source because I know it'll be the death of any backing argument. Bill Moyers and Charlie Rose kick some serious ass too.

[DroppinScience]

Sure, sounds good. I usually never use Slate or Common Dreams as a source because I know it'll be the death of any backing argument. Bill Moyers and Charlie Rose kick some serious ass too.

Oh no, something like Common Dreams is an excellent resource. Yeah, they're biased in that their intent is to serve the "progressive community" but they're courteous enough to tell us this from the get-go. Many other sites, you have to dig around before you realize what biases they have.

And not only that, Common Dreams is essentially a repository collecting articles from OTHER reputable news sources so you have them all in one spot. This includes BBC, The Guardian, The Nation, NY Times, Associated Press, Agence France Press, Salon.com, Washington Post, as well as their own original material. And yes, that does include good ol' Bill Moyers. In other words, if you were to argue Common Dreams is not valid, you'd then have to discount literally every other media source (large and small).

[yeahwho]

Oh no, something like Common Dreams is an excellent resource. Yeah, they're biased in that their intent is to serve the "progressive community" but they're courteous enough to tell us this from the get-go. Many other sites, you have to dig around before you realize what biases they have.

And not only that, Common Dreams is essentially a repository collecting articles from OTHER reputable news sources so you have them all in one spot. This includes BBC, The Guardian, The Nation, NY Times, Associated Press, Agence France Press, Salon.com, Washington Post, as well as their own original material. And yes, that does include good ol' Bill Moyers. In other words, if you were to argue Common Dreams is not valid, you'd then have to discount literally every other media source (large and small).


I'm not sure if your directing this towards me, it isn't really clear.

I never use liberal leaning sources as a link, that doesn't mean I would not read them. I just usually go with the writer or the original source. If your engaging somebody who has a different political slant, those sights are red flags to conservatives. I try and begin with a main stream media outlet.

The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/) is an exceptionally brilliant paper, mainstream yet like the NYTimes some great writing. It's fun to read and many times spot on.

It's all good. I'm a news junky. I need to get my fix early on in the day and I continue through to the night. As much as I've heard that the media is a bastion of liberals I just do not see it. When you combine all forms of media, the overwhelming majority of our population listens, reads or watches news being presented by a major corporate owned entity that actually does nothing to protect us from the powerful, they're just lapdogs begging for scraps.

That is why the internet is such a blast and also why I like this place, it's free speech.

[saz]

the ny times is incredibly centrist and mainstream. if they had truly left wing leanings, then they'd be shoving kucinich, bernie sanders, nader et al and their platforms down their readers throats on a daily basis.

michael moore has always been an independent, taking on and criticizing both the republicans and the democrats. however, in the last four years or so, he is starting to become more and more of a partisan democrat, which is very disappointing. regardless, his movies are amazing.