5 simple sentences
 

These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read:

You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation.

You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

Now don't start quoting great men of the cloth. You'll start a riot...lol. Love the quote.

Morphing Again?
 

Has the thread morphed to a criticism of The New York Times instead of a discussion of the column written by one of the most respected columnists in the country? The last time I looked, there were a couple of truisms about the Times op ed page...

• The Times, like any other newspaper which publishes syndicated columns written by columnists, has no editorial control over what they write. They can hire them and fire them, possibly even on the basis of their political leanings. But tell them what to write? No way.

• Tom Friedman has a reputation for writing pretty middle-of-the-road and thought-provoking opinion pieces. Today's column certainly falls in that category.

• Is the New York Times liberal? I think most people would agree that most of the content of the paper is pretty liberal. But the paper can also be complimented for publishing both reported news and op ed columns that are written for a more thoughtful and educated audience than the average daily newspaper. It is certainly a more thought-provoking media than papers such as the Orlando Sentinel, USAToday or The Villages Daily Sun, for sure. If one wants to read an intelligent "view from the left" on subjects of national and worldwide interest, the New York Times is an excellent choice.

So, if I might, let's agree that the New York Times is a liberal-leaning newspaper. And just maybe, discuss the column by Tom Friedman.

I won't go into the almost laughable things you say about editorial control of columnists at The Times or Tom Friedman's views on globalization's role in environmentalism or Friedman's mixed metaphoric writing style.

I have already given my opinion about Tom Friedman's opinion in the column you linked in this post.

But to the issue of your exalting review of Tom Friedman's opinion column. There is no doubt Friedman is revered. But it is interesting to see informed liberals supporting a "middle of the road" columnist who was pied in the face at Brown University on Earth Day; who attacks and defames Arabs and the Arab world; who, speaking in support of the US invasion of Iraq after 9/11 on Charlie Rose explained the "bubbles" of Nasdaq, corporate governments and terrorist bubbles, said, "...We needed to go over there basically ummm and ummm uhhh take out a very big stick, ummm right in the heart of that world and ummm and burst that bubble...What they needed to see were American boys and girls going house to house from Basra to Baghdad, umm and basically saying 'which part of this sentence don't you understand?' Well suck on this. Okay. ...we could have hit Saudi Arabia... We could have hit Pakistan. We hit Iraq because we could. That's the real truth..."

Just an observation.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOF6ZeUvgXs[/ame]

ptownrob--- I think Donna2 was probably refering to more recent leaks. In December of 2005, even though warned about compromising on going investigations, the Times revealed the existance of an ultra secret terrorist surveillance program of the NSA. They gave details on how it was implmented. Also, remember when the Times disclosed highly classified US intellegience programs that successfully penetrated the international bank transactions of the alQaeda terrorists? Don't you ever wonder what side the Times are on??

Conservatives
 

Do not let the Liberal Progressive talk about the New York Times hide the truth from your minds.

The New York Times is a desperate failure because of its biased attempt to promote Liberal causes.

To say that its readers are more thoughtful or better educated than most other people is such disgusting snobbery it makes me sick.

The paper does has and does not only misreport facts it has deliberately told lies.

The so called thoughful readers really ensourage these lies because they think it it helps their ideology.

Thoughtful, by the way, is not a description a conservative would use to descibe a New York Times reader who believes all the lies and spin in that paper.

ptownrob-- How can you possibly say you don't get the liberal side on FOX News??? Liberals not only have their own show, but are on constantly as commentators. When was the last time you saw a "real" Republican on MSNBC??

Good links Bucco,


A Ponzi scheme will only work when there is weekly donations. When 30 million people do not contribute weekly from the payrolls the scheme starts to tumble.
Money goes into the Feds weekly and money goes out weekly. The so-called financial genius's can twist, turn, roll, hop etc. etc. but it is simple math.
You need to get those contributions back again and only REAL jobs will do it. Public "servants" and union pensions are going to ruin us.

I compare the idiots running this country to children running your household. Imagine your children controlling your check book and they just purchase things and only pay enough of the bills so they don't take your house away. Re-finance your house every month and pay one credit card payment with another credit card until you have more credit cards then Carter has pills.
We need to put the adults back in charge in November.

Well, now you've hit the nail right on the head! Congress & the entire federal government IS a Ponzie Scheme! Well said.