From: Grlygrl201@aol.com
Date: Tue Jan 30 2001 - 10:01:52 PST
In a message dated 1/30/01 7:20:03 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Yangkun.Zhang@FMR.COM writes:
<< The Taxophiliacs
Dan Seligman, Forbes Magazine, 02.05.01
Hypothesis: While the NEW President makes his case for a $1.6 trillion tax
cut over ten years-a figure representing less than a third of currently
projected surpluses in the decade-he will have to overcome some powerful
opposition in media circles, like, say, the New York Times. I recently
searched the Nexis database for mentions of taxes in the Times editorial
columns. Why this paper? Because the world is full of folks, many of them on
other media transmission belts, who look to the Times for clues about what's
right, and how issues must be framed, and which facial expression is
appropriate when the anchor is reading the script on taxes. >>
hereyago, from the liberal media examining the liberal media:
<<The NYT goes inside with an update on the Clinton gift motherlode
and the last-minute Clinton pardons. The story is headlined (online
at least) and goes high with Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott's
disapproval of both. Why not headline and/or give higher play to
George W. Bush's decision not to try to reverse any of the
pardons or to Hillary Clinton's remarks about them yesterday?
Instead, the Times reprises the facts of the two matters before
quoting Sen. Clinton in the 14th paragraph as saying about the
gifts: "We followed all the rules. I am not going to get into any
more details. We complied with everything that presidents and their
families are expected to comply with." And before quoting her in
the 17th paragraph as saying about the pardons: "You're going to
have to ask the president's transition office for a comment....I
have no opinion. I had no opinion before. I had no opinion at the
time. I have no opinion now."
from
today's papers
The No Opinion Pol
by Scott Shuger
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 31 2001 - 04:56:14 PST