View Full Version : Michael Gordon of the NY Times
ShinyTop
04-03-2003, 12:33 AM
I have been listening to CNN interview the military analyst of the NY Times, Michael Gordon. Now Gordon may be a good writer, I don't really know, but I don't know how in the hell SM and I are unemployed if this guy can get a job as a military analyst. But I have learned it is good to listen to him. As soon as he reaches a conclusion the opposite occurs to prove him wrong, yet again.
ethics
04-03-2003, 08:28 AM
There's only one person in NYTimes, who knows what he is speaking of and that person is Thomas Friedman. Guest editorials withstanding.
Robert Harris
04-03-2003, 10:13 AM
Originally posted by ethics
There's only one person in NYTimes, who knows what he is speaking of and that person is Thomas Friedman. Guest editorials withstanding.
Sorry buddy, but you are dead wrong. At least with respect to regular columnists.
Bob Herbert, who regularly writes a column for Op-ed page, covers general social policy issues and racial issues very well and -- on issues I know something about -- usually is right on the money.
Maureen Dowd, while usually writing in a humorous vein, generally has good insights into the oddities of Washington politics. That sort of thing, of course, requires humor.
Paul Krugman does an excellent job of analyzing economic poloicy issues. Probably because he understands them, being an economist rather than a journalist. And an economist well recognized in the profession as first-rate.
William Safire also covers politics well.
Some of the others also seem pretty good but I won't comment because I do not read Keller and Kristoff as regularly.
Seems to me you are denigrating those who sometimes do not agree with your increasingly muddled, right-wing views. :cool:
ethics
04-03-2003, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by Robert Harris
Bob Herbert, who regularly writes a column for Op-ed page, covers general social policy issues and racial issues very well and -- on issues I know something about -- usually is right on the money.
He is ok, I've read better in the Atlantic, and other less mainstream news outlets.
Maureen Dowd, while usually writing in a humorous vein, generally has good insights into the oddities of Washington politics. That sort of thing, of course, requires humor.
The humor aspect has been getting lost with her frustrations of Bush. Too bad, she had a lot of potential, especially after winning her award.
Paul Krugman does an excellent job of analyzing economic poloicy issues. Probably because he understands them, being an economist rather than a journalist. And an economist well recognized in the profession as first-rate.
Socialistsareus.come has better writers, and probably more compelling to their cause. Sorry, pal, but just because you love the guy's opinions doesn't mean he is good in what he does. His arguments are lame.
William Safire also covers politics well.
Actually, this is where I was wrong and forgotten. I definitely agree that Safire is worth a read.