[Wuli]

Wahsington Examiner is often inferior journalism and seldom groundbreaking journalism.

The article is a rehash of an article in the Wall Street Journal.

The W_Examiner fails miserably when, unlike the WSJ, it does not give its readers the benefit of identifying where are the five VA hospitals that have improved. Something I imagine most readers of the article are interested in.

For me the fact that the W_Examiber gave the link to the WSJ article and I could go fishing there was still not representative of quality jounralism.

[caww]

I beg to differ with you as Paul Bedard often has excellent articles in the Washington Examiner. I'm far more interested in the trustworthiness 'of the authors' who write than what might be considered an otherwise popular site to some. As to any actual journalism today, let alone investigative journalism, one is surely hard pressed to find even in the Wall Street Journal. However, since I don't care to fork over $$$ to Wall Street J. I am certainly grateful for the news sites reporting otherwise.

Additionally....it is not uncommon one needs to look further for ‘details’ about an article written of which they have interest in further details...Freepers often come together with their ‘findings’ when there's sufficient interest.

I might suggest you go to the VA site itself to discover all 15 which were listed initially. I am delighted to see our Presidents efforts to take care of the facilities for our vets is getting results. Which is the point of placing this thread......... Happy fishing ;)