Showing posts with label newspapers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label newspapers. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

Who's Laughing Now?


"I submitted the budget today to Congress -- it's on a laptop notebook, an e-budget. It saves paper, saves trees, saves money. I think it's the first budget submitted electronically. And it's a good budget. It's a budget that achieves some important objectives. One, it understands our top priority is to defend our country, so we fund our military, as well as fund the homeland security. Secondly, the budget keeps our economy growing." — President Bush, Cabinet Meeting, February 4

The New York Times published an article today
revealing that the Iraqi government expects a surplus as large as $79 billion for its 2008 budget.

www.thewhitehouse.gov projects the 2008 budget deficit to be $389 billion in a mid-session review of fiscal year 2009. The site assures us that the budget "Introduces a new culture of accountability on wasteful earmarks."

Which brings us back to the Times article, and what it tells us about Iraq's surplus:

The figures could be used to argue that because the Iraqi ministries still do not have the capacity to spend their own money, further assistance from the United States is called for, Ms. Alexander said. Or the huge oil revenues could be seen as proof that Iraq has the resources to solve its own problems if it would only use the money.
And in an even more ridiculous twist, the United States has payed Iraq at least $435.6 million in interest on the money because it is held in the Federal Reserve Bank.

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Repeat Offense

Click to examine.

Bellevue, 520, Microsoft, oh my!

Is it too much to ask that they just rename them The Eastside Times and The Eastside Post-Intelligencer?

Wednesday, July 9, 2008

Twins!

twins.JPG

It's no secret that The Seattle Times and the PI are joined at the hip — literally and figuratively — but yesterday's front pages just screamed out for comparison.

Like here, onn the left, the PI: "Court nixes county's land use limits.

And on the right, the Times: "Court says rural-land restrictions go too far."


Yes, they are on opposite sides of the paper, but they are actually about the same ruling.

Both papers also feature housing costs as their big issue — no surprise, considering that they cater to a solid middle-class readership. But it really is too much when they both cite Windermere in their battling coverage.

Combined, the two papers ran 27 articles referencing "mortgage"— in just one day.

Guys, why delay the inevitable? Just merge them already.