I'm having a hard time deciding what part of this article makes me madder.
This article in today's Chronicle really chapps my buns and I'm having a hard time deciding which part is the worst insult. Is it the two lefty blog links to the one righty blog link ratio? Or is it that the Chronicle uses Pew polling data to justify Internet regulation. Let us not forget that it was Pew, donating, maybe not anonymously, but certainly with a quiet wink and nod, through intermediaries that got McCain-Feingold passed to begin with. (See this link, warning, registration required, or this link to see video of Sean Treglia admit he bought and paid for BRCA with $39 million PEW dollars). Or is it the subtle gut feel that the Chronicle would LIKE to see more regulation for us, but not for them.
Which do you think is the most egregious insult?
Which do you think is the most egregious insult?
posted by Rorschach at
6/28/2005 12:47:00 PM
3 Comments:
It was that damned Hamilton that screwed the whole thing up when he argued for a judiciary that was not only not answerable to the people, but was appointed for life.
You should really enjoy their editorial today lamenting the SCOTUS decision not to intervene in the Reporter's "First Amendment" case.
Do I sense an attempt to silence the competition?
If you count being beaten over the head with it until you are unconscious, "sensing", then yeah, that's about right.....
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home