Replies

most of these smaller papers, almost all of them, have very few orignal stories of their own except local news. they all get their "feeds" from the new york times and the networks and the wire services, and then write these articles.

why can't FR just form its own web based "newspaper". we could have "authors", who take in the same information the same way, and write their own versions of the stories in their own words. then those could serve as the basis for the discussions which follow. that's essentially what most of these smaller papers do.

Here is an examble of what I am talking about

Today I read in the Washington post that we live in the age of the public apology. A few examples such as “Bill Clinton's 1992 apology to his wife for his sexual infidelities“ and the Oprah Winfrey show were given but the author (Tony Judt) failed to draw any conclusion or meaning from all of this.

Next she went on to bash President Bush for not apologizing soon enough and only seeking justice and not penitence for injustices done to POWs in Iraq.

The author when on to bash Condoleezza Rice for being a “mediocre national security adviser “. At this point I skipped the rest of the article and went strait to the conclusion.

“Bush had no option but to acknowledge immediately that terrible things had been done in Iraq -- and he would be wise to make sure that he has been told and is telling the whole story. “ Yea, like Bush is a liar, some people are really stupid.

We are on the same page. There are great writers here at FR and we could compete with the best news paper in the world. This is an opportunity, to become even better! I say go for it. I'll help, I am the worst writer on the net, that is sure to stir things up.

Just like karaoke at my bar, I tell folks if yall don't sing I'm gonna, then after a couple of songs everyone want to sing just to get me off stage. LOL, works every time.