But the real howler is this quote: "Theoretically unattached to any campaign, the 527's were in reality creatures of the presidential campaigns of George Bush and John Kerry. The Democrats led in the race to funnel money through the 527's, and because they were more successful, Republicans in Congress may look more favorably on closing the loophole. But in the end, the Democrats were hurt by the 527's more than they were helped, particularly by the work of the infamous Swift Boat Veterans for Truth committee. That experience should make both parties equally chary of allowing the practice to continue...."
And nary a word about their flawed presidential candidate-opportunist, or the Congressional abridgement of Freedom of Speech so dear to the Times.
whoever let this go out with the word "chary" should be shot. Since their observations are so offensive to me, I find I prefer to edit their statements.....
PJComix should start a thread based on the NYTimes editorial page...
This really isn't a bad list. At first glance, I think I can especially agree with them about sex trafficking, and farm subsidies. Working on world poverty is also a wonderful goal, but any serious effort on that topic involves spreading the free enterprise system -- something that liberals hate and will surely oppose.
A "problem" that could be eliminated tomorrow if the United States was granted the imperial power it deserves. We alone grow enough food to feed the world. It's not that the food isn't there or that it's not available; it's that corrupt powers within starving nations use food as a weapon. Allow the US free rein in seeing that its largesse is distributed fairly and the problem will disappear.
SEX TRAFFICKING
Oh come on. How big an issue is this really? And don't give me a lot of Phil Donahue boo-hoo about the tens of thousands of women and children sold into virtual slavery blah blah blah. I'm having trouble believing that, overnight, the flesh market has exploded.
QUALITY HEALTH CARE
Manufactured non-issue. Socialist agitprop.
AGRICULTURAL SUBSIDIES
Sunset them. Five years and they're gone. And this is coming from a guy in the heart of the Midwest.
CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
Non-issue. Reread the First Amendment. Then overturn McCain-Feingold and do something about the MONEY, not the rhetoric.
I stopped reading right there. Such self-sanctimonious hogwash. People have been feeding the poor for eons before "the left" ever hatched. They've merely tried to glom the good works of others for their own political gain.
A real leap of faith would be for people to think that the media is capable of actually reporting the FACTS rather than injecting their america hating agenda into every story!
The goals can't be disagreed with, but the means can.
The way to end world hunger, for instance, insofar as that is possible, chiefly involves two things. First, most hunger in the third world is caused by wars, such as the war in the Sudan. And most of those wars are caused by Muslims. I don't know if we can venture to interfere in places like Africa, but it could be argued that it's in our interest to help the African Christians against the African Muslims, who are busy killing them. In the long term it will make a huge difference whether the Christians or the Muslims win the race for the soul of Africa.
Second, we need to help people help themselves. That not only means giving them farming implements rather than food. It also means deposing terrorist and socialist regimes who will not let their people farm safely. The former Rhodesia is a good case in point.
Sending out shiploads of wheat and condoms no doubt warms the cockles of the NY Times's editors, but it does little good for the recipients.
Isn't that vintage New York Times?
Coming up with a long list of New Year's resolutions for everybody else to do -- so we can all match their infinite perfectness?
Last one to leave, turn off the lights and take out Helen Thomas with you.