There's nothing really connecting these two stories except the fact that I saw them around the same time and both tickled me. From here:
Broccoli is getting a moment of redemption in the White House.
Boy, here's a milestone it's not good to reach:
CNS News reports that our shriveled full-time private sector workforce is now smaller than the number of people who receive subsidized food assistance from the federal government.
[. . .]
Behind Wal-Mart, the second-largest employer in America is Kelly Services, a temporary work provider.
In a sure sign that the silly season is upon us, the editor of the Chicago Sun-Times newspaper has apologized to "anyone offended" by this headline:
Fright 214
At least 2 die, 181 taken to hospital after S.F. crash-landing
It's explained that the Asian American Journalists Association says:
Guess it's official now -- The Associated Press is part of the Media For Obama cheering section:
President Barack Obama is laying our a vision for better government services delivered at lower taxpayer expense.
It's not like this is anything new, but seeing it again is depressing anyway. From the latest Gallup poll:
PRINCETON, NJ -- Television is the main place Americans say they turn to for news about current events (55%), leading the Internet, at 21%. Nine percent say newspapers or other print publications are their main news source, followed by radio, at 6%.
Yeah, sure, he's the Dalai Lama and all, so we have to acknowledge that his heart's in the right place. Still thise sounds naively optimistic even for him:
The Dalai Lama said he was counting on young people to created a "happier" century as he celebrated his 78th birthday on Saturday in southern India with tens of thousands of Tibetan exiles.
Regular readers know I've been arguing against a shield law for journalists for years, for many reasons, chief among them that the press can't be a very effective watchdog of the government if the government is allowed to define who the legitimate press is. James Taranto of The Wall Street Journal fills out that argument a little by putting it in historical context