Posted on 12/29/2013 8:00:50 AM PST by the scotsman
Texas is southern
Mississippi delta still has lots of cotton.
Cotton and soybeans
I think Texas and California and Arizona lead US cotton production now
Mississippi is fourth but given the soil and variety has best yields
This thread on Dixie became about how the South treats Jews exactly why?
Ridiculous
One worries about Jews....it watch Brooklyn...just saying
Most Jews in Dixie are tucked in nice and safe....and prospering and getting on with the goyim just fine
What is this obsession really about?
Local reporters cover local stories. You seem to be under the impression that local newspapers can afford to send reporters to Uganda for stories. But I will keep trying.
You are right about magazines. We were talking about newspapers.
For the most part I agree, but you hardly ever learn anything of substance in the Post. The Enquirer is better at a lot of that stuff.
The Post is good for political scandals on the Left but ignores or downplays the scandals on the Right, the opposite of the Times.
For the most part I agree, but you hardly ever learn anything of substance in the Post. The Enquirer is better at a lot of that stuff.
The Post is good for political scandals on the Left but ignores or downplays the scandals on the Right, the opposite of the Times.
For science, a personal passion, and for what is going on in far-flung places, the Times has no equal, other than the Journal.
The Enquirer is national, however, and we have so many scandals in NY State and City that we need a whole separate newspaper for them.
My impression is that the Post does all scandals, left and right. They covered Vito Fossella thoroughly, for instance. There are just more of them on the left.
On state and city news, also, you do learn the substance. And it’s easier to figure out what’s going on because the Post doesn’t try to shift everything starboard all the time.
I do agree that the Times can do good close, in-depth stuff. I especially liked their coverage of Richard III’s body being discovered, for instance. The science coverage is pretty good of course—they still have that section, which is kind of amazing.
I never said that and you are trying to put words in my mouth. You praised the writing in a puff piece article in the NYT that covered the American south. My point was simply that the coverage of local stories by local papers through out the US is excellent.
Long ago the NYT and LAT and Tomes of London became compositors of AP and UPI raw feeds. I am old enough to remember real correspondents. And frankly I don’t much care about what goes in Uganda
I do care what is going on in other countries, partially because I am genuinely interested and also because external events often impact us here.
We care about different things and that is just fine.
My central point is that if there is quality information to be gleaned, the source is immaterial to me.
For example, anyone interested in science who does not read the Times on Tuesdays is missing some great stuff.
I read journals thanks very much when I want science information. I don’t care about Uganda precisely because it is a squalid nation that rotates dictators in and out.
Quote whatever source you want but expect to get push back on those that have an agenda that is commie driven
Very interesting
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.