About
Earl Aagaard’s opinions about everything that interests him. Og also enjoys gardening, travel, reading, woodbutchery, and lots of other stuff.
Categories
Monthly Archives
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- December 2011
- September 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- May 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- Complete Archives
- Category Archives
Join Og's Mailing List
Powered by ExpressionEngine
OgBlog.net
Saturday, February 28, 2009
IN CASE YOU’RE WONDERING WHY THE NEW YORK TIMES IS LOSING READERSHIP AND MAY GO UNDER…..
Have a look at JOHN HINDERAKER’S ANALYSIS over at the blog called POWERLINE.
.
In this blog post, he compares the Times’ reactions to GW Bush’s budget proposals back in 2004, and the analysis they applied at that time, to what is being said about the current spending plans in Washington D.C.
.
Here’s a short excerpt:
.
NYT, September 2, 2003:
The White House serenely brushed off a detailed caution from the Congressional Budget Office last week that the growth in the deficit is more likely to roar than retreat across the next decade, fed
by the three Bush tax cuts and other debt-fattening indulgences. If that warning was not enough, how about the concern reported at the International Monetary Fund that the administration has no
credible plan to restore budget balance? Yes, the I.M.F., which must lecture the profligates of the globe, is worried that a structural deficit will push up interest rates and restrain growth as America
ceaselessly borrows to steer red ink from imbalanced budgets onto future taxpayers.Now that his planned deficits are four times larger, does Obama’s budget contain “debt-fattening indulgences?” Has the Times denounced them? Does the Obama administration have a “credible plan to restore budget balance?” Given that Obama’s intended budgets—put aside how optimistic his numbers may be—far exceed the actual deficits during the Bush administration, is the Times still “worried that a structural deficit will push up interest rates and restrain growth as America ceaselessly borrows to steer red ink from imbalanced budgets onto future taxpayers?” If not, why not?
Reading
- BlogsForDummies :)
Web resources
- Arts & Letters Daily
- Ravi Zacharias
- Southern Adventist University
- The SAU Biology Deptartment - where I work with a bunch of very neat people.
- Venezuelan news—FROM Venezuela