Somehow the Dutch have found it useful to look back in order to plan two centuries into the future. Is there any institution in this country that can even conceive of planning in that kind of time frame?
Why was that attack on the WTC treated, successfully (to hear President Bush tell it), as a criminal matter, while the 2001 attack was treated as a casus belli--not one war, but two?
Another in a series of what newspaper reporters used to call sob stories, no sense of the context of the disaster, nor of the cause.
I thought if any national news coverage would have the time and the commitment to perspective to link the Jena 6 story to that of Shaquanda Cotton, it would be PBS' Newshour. But no such luck.
I guess the answer would be a major Sunday "takeout" on depression in New Orleans that never mentions the disappearance of as much as 80% of the mental health professionals from the city.
In almost two hours of television blather, Hillary must have mentioned her commitment to the recovery of New Orleans. I must have just missed it.
Why do the words "class warfare" only enter the political discourse when the Republicans oppose actions which would disadvantage the advantaged?
It's arguable that the laughably low approval rating the public gives Congress is attributable to that body's failure to move the ball one inch down the field.
Why is it, given a story of people fighting for freedom against a fearsome military junta, that cable news far preferred this week to discuss the burning question: Is Bill O'Reilly really a racist?
CNN appears determined to make its international feed unobtainable in this country. But 90 minutes of Al Jazeera English is like watching real news; I'll need some time to recover.
In taking John Bolton semi-seriously, do the Brits perceive something we don't, that he's the unrestrained, uninhibited id of the Bush administration, wishing for what his brethren still in power are planning?
