2,890 karma · joined April 3, 2007
"Some decision was made. Someone important said it was good b/c of A but others say it is bad b/c of B. 10 years ago when a similar decision was made, A was the result. But on the other hand it is very hard to measure B, and it's effects can be mitigated by C. An expert acknowledged the risk of B but said that the benefits of A made it worth it."
Usually the reporter's actual opinion was whatever side he gave the last word. In this case A. I find it tedious to play this passive aggressive game. I would rather read two articles saying:
This decision is good b/c of A.
and
This decision is bad b/c of B.
Like Arrington said, at least I know where they stand and why.
http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/paramount_vantage/waiting...
Some of those scenes are from the lottery to get into the DC voucher program. DC is my hometown and the public schools are Cuisinarts for kids. Recently all future funding for the DC voucher program was pulled.
We've all been there... A few nights before a release we realize we have an unmaintainable mess and the deadline needs to be pushed so we can go back to square one. This is what happens when you release anyways.
Did Obama just hire a very talented propagandist, or a guy who deftly presents the bill's inadequacies? I guess we'll find out. Either way, his presentation will certainly be the anchor point of the stimulus debate.