[chesley]

Damn, you’re good!

[CdMGuy]

Wow, sure glad I dropped my subscription back in 1965. I wonder what this fellow will say when the global warming gang has to admit that we actually have global cooling.

[Flash Bazbeaux]

“We don’t need for voters to understand the science. We just need for them to elect the right people and grant them the necessary authority.”

Implicit in this statement, of course, is the notion that the journalists DO “understand the science” — an almost certainly false notion — or else the journalists are in a better position than the public to know who to trust with respect to matters the journalists are incapable of verifying — a facially absurd notion.

[Lady Heron]

“Trying to give balanced coverage plays into the hands of those who would spread doubt about the need for government to take charge in this crisis,” Stengel went on. “There is no time for debate. We don’t need for voters to understand the science. We just need for them to elect the right people and grant them the necessary authority.”

These people are just bleeping scary!

Give up your brain vote dem.

[joebuck]

“Trying to give balanced coverage plays into the hands of those who would spread doubt about the need for government to take charge in this crisis,”

Is this right out of Orwell's 1984 or what? What's scary is that elitist libs really think this way.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

A full account of facts would be too complicated and confusing for our readers.

In the old days Time was one of the very, very few places you could go for a full (more or less) account of facts. Not that long ago, the 1960s.

Who needs "objective" journalism? Facts, yes. But reporting without some bias (spinning)? Just give me a MSM WITHOUT GATEKEEPERS!

We used to have more than one newspaper in every city.

All I ever wanted during the "Fairness Doctrine" days of "One hour a week of Firing Line is enough conservative balance" was a place where I could find "the rest of the story."

"I didn't know that others believed as I do!" was the most oft-repeated caller comment in the early days of modern talk radio.

We have a free press again. It's been defended by the blood of citizens past (and present vis-a-vis the WOT). No more "Fairness Doctrine" BS either! Defend the free press here! Our free press, their blood.

[steelyourfaith]

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[beethovenfan]

Typical liberal arrogance - “we’ll tell you what to think,
the facts would just confuse you”. What an anal aperture.

[penowa]

"A full account of facts would be too complicated and confusing for our readers."

If Time had any real readers, they indeed would find the explanation of the hoax being perpetrated as too complicated and too confusing for their 3rd grade reading ability.

Since the only reason Time exists is for persons in waiting rooms in MD and dentist offices to scan half an article before being called for their appointment, nobody reads the garbage they produce or notices what a fraudulent publication completely lacking in merit it is.

[Onelifetogive]

I thought the AZCONSERVATIVE only did spoof pieces and satire. When did it start running real news?