More subdued libs are mostly pleased
Cohn also points out something all of us who follow this stuff can too-often forget: very few people were watching yesterday or will read about the speech today. “Its significance lies primarily in how it frames the debate, and negotiations, going forward,” he writes.
For sheer color and audacity, the Journal’s editorial page will be fine viewing as that debate goes on.
‘See you on the other side’ - Meet Jessica Lum, a terminally ill 25-year-old who chose to spend what little time she had practicing journalism
#Realtalk: This is the best moment to be in journalism - The old stuff isn’t coming back, but that’s okay
Streams of consciousness - Millennials expect a steady diet of quick-hit, social-media-mediated bits and bytes. What does that mean for journalism?
Sticking with the truth - How ‘balanced’ coverage helped sustain the bogus claim that childhood vaccines can cause autism
An ink-stained stretch - Can Aaron Kushner save the Orange County Register—and the newspaper industry?
Obama’s war on leaks undermines investigative journalism
“[T]he most militant I have seen since the Nixon administration”
‘It was approved at the highest levels— and I mean the highest’
Holder OK’d search warrant for Fox News reporter’s private emails, official says
If cable is dying, why is it still making so much money?
The story behind one of the best business models in the country
What TVGuide.com watchlist data reveals about the season’s new dramas
“What was once genre is now the Zeitgeist”
CJR's Guide to Online News Startups
Uptown Messenger – Hyperlocal news for a neighborhood in New Orleans
Who Owns What
The Business of Digital Journalism
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.
Of all the pundits you mentioned, except for Paul Krugman, a Pulitzer Prize-winning economist and widely and deeply published professor of graduate economics, not a single one of them have a shred of expertise in evaluating economic policy or a policy speech.
Who, really, gives a crap what Mickey Kaus says, especially on budget issues? I mean, really. Did he take Econ 101 or something, that you quote him, Joel? And it is stultifyingly predictable that the WSJ and Krauthammer -- indeed, no one on the right -- would hate the speech and the policy. Big whoop.
And who the hell is Clive Crook? And why does anyone care about what he says? Does he have any expertise in economics, budget matters, domestic policy? Or is he just another boring pundit pulling opinions out of his ear? Because the media, and the beltway, are full of those, and full of *it.*
It would have been more helpful if you had gotten some input from people who actually know what they are talking about with respect to these issues, Joel.
#1 Posted by James, CJR on Thu 14 Apr 2011 at 09:11 PM
The Ryan plan is a sick joke, as even real conservatives will tell you,
http://edition.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/bestoftv/2011/04/06/exp.arena.ryan.budget.plan.cnn.html
What the a-hole beltway, one-way civility police are upset about is that people smarter than them recognize that their "new approach" under Ryan's wrapping is the same approach they've wrapped up and passed to the American public for the last 30 years.
And what makes them really upset is when people point out the republicans were handed a country on sound fiscal footing in 1999 and they pissed it away:
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/04/just-simple-truth
And they get upset because pointing that out might lead people to realize restoring sound fiscal responsibility may be just a matter of undoing the last decade of insanity.
#2 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 14 Apr 2011 at 11:55 PM
Are Pulitzer Prizes really awarded in economics these days? Wow, I learn so much from reading CJR message threads that I don't find out from any other source.
#3 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Fri 15 Apr 2011 at 04:55 PM
Whups. I meant Nobel Prize. Krugman's Nobel Prize in Economics. Thanks for pointing out my mistake, Mr. Richard.
My overall point stands: Why should anyone, anyone at all, care about what these other wankers, Mickey effin' Kaus, fer crissakes!, have to say about policy speeches on economic matters, Joel?
#4 Posted by James, CJR on Sat 16 Apr 2011 at 11:45 AM
For the same reason one presumes that in spite of the absence of a Nobel Prize or PhD in economics (I'm guessing) in your own curriculum vitae, James, you still post on these threads, evidently believing your opinion matters, too.
#5 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Sun 17 Apr 2011 at 07:07 PM
Krugman is the guy who predicted in 1997 that the internet wouldn't have any greater impact on the economy than the fax machine did.
A Nobel prize means the guy is bright... Not necessarily right...
#6 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 17 Apr 2011 at 08:50 PM
Nope, no PhD in economics, nor a Nobel Prize, or even a Pulitzer Prize. I did, however, pass Econ 101 with a good grade back in the day. Which makes my opinion on economic policy statements more relevant that those of Mickey effin' Kaus or Charles Krauthammer.
However, unlike Mickey effin' Kraus, @Joel isn't writing posts about my opinion of any economic policy speech. There's where the difference is.
#7 Posted by James, CJR on Sun 17 Apr 2011 at 10:21 PM