by DemFromCT
High winds are wreaking havoc with my power supply. Flickering computers lend themselves to very short posts.
Chgeck out the latest rundown in the unpopular President's stuck in the basement poll numbers pre-SOTU. He's running 39-43 as usual. The WaPo remains an outlier IMHO, though there may be outliers in the other direction, too from time to time (like Harris 34% in Nov).
The 'real' number is of course dynamic, but let not this nonsense about 'comeback' continue. Bush's approvals will have a mini-bounce after SOTU and sink back by February.
C. Boyden Gray's going to Brussels. On a recess appointment, which makes him a kind of Euro-Bolton.
Posted by: Kagro X | January 18, 2006 at 10:35
Seems like I can't turn a page in the Times without reading about the surreptitiously fictionalized autobiography "A Million Little Pieces." Summary of their coverage this week (my search may have missed some):
Jan 17 1 article
1 column
2 wire
7 letters
Jan 15 1 article
1 column
Jan 14 1 article
1 column
1 brief
Jan 13 1 column
Jan 12 1 article
1 column
Jan 11 1 front-page article
1 article
1 column
Why is the Times expending so much coverage on a (relatively uninteresting) story about someone exaggerating or fictionalizing their facts?
There has been a similar recent spate of articles on fraud in scientific publishing. That seems to have attracted their attention less -- perhaps because in that case the perpetrators are not getting away with it.
This may be a subconscious fixation at the Times with made-up reporting in general and those who are forgiven for it in particular. Or it may be a nice lesson in how a newspaper can conduct a political campaign (in this case on its own behalf) merely by choosing which stories to cover, and how often to write about them.
Posted by: emptypockets | January 18, 2006 at 10:51
gallup:
Posted by: DemFromCT | January 18, 2006 at 12:27
more gallup:
Posted by: DemFromCT | January 18, 2006 at 12:28
DemFromCT, is this bird flu money just going to add profits at drug companies, who will be able to raise prices now that their consumers have new drug-buying grants -- or is that kind of price-gouging prevented somehow?
Posted by: emptypockets | January 18, 2006 at 17:37