Not Up to Par

Pat Oliphant's cartoon attacking President Bush is mean but not insightful. (Not on The State website. But we'll upload a copy soon.)

Bigotry on the Op-Ed Page?

Just because you view large numbers of American Christians with fear, suspicion, and contempt doesn't exclude you from access to The State's Opinion page. America's Worst Newspaper publishes a little gem from Paul Krugman today:

Democratic societies have a hard time dealing with extremists in their midst ...

[This is] true of the United States, where dangerous extremists belong to the majority religion and the majority ethnic group and wield great political influence.

And here's the clincher:

America is not yet a place where liberal politicians, and even conservatives who are not sufficiently hard-line, fear assassination. But unless moderates take a stand against the growing power of domestic extremists, it can happen here.

So there you have it. Paul Krugman submits a column comparing conservative Christians in America to murderous Islamic extremists in Europe and no one at The State bats an eye.

Warrin' Warren Bolton

The journalists at America's Worst Newspaper (tm) don't spend a lot of time reporting (see below). So what are they writing? A quick glance at the editorial page reveals that a shortage of facts won't prevent them from expressing a wide variety of opinions.

Here's The State's Warren Bolton dismissing calls for education reform while noting

Those who want Put Parents in Charge to pass . . . complain about the state’s 50th SAT ranking, its 50 percent dropout rate and the fact that 74 percent of eighth-graders can’t read at a proficient level.

Now he acts as if these "complaints" are little more than the whining of a four-year old denied naptime. But aren't these complaints actually, um, legitimate?

Earlier in the article, Bolton opines that

The governor and those who support his tax cut plan, being sold as a way to “Put Parents in Charge” of children’s education, say it will make public schools better. But they never say how it would improve our schools.

But if he were actually familiar with the debate, he would know that this question has been answered repeatedly by the parental choice advocates. They say repeatedly that public schools aren't inherently bad; and given the right incentive--e.g., free parents who have a choice in education--they'll rise to the challenge and provide a better product. Here's Harvard economist Caroline Minter Hoxby on the issue:

Market enthusiasts have always argued . . . that competition will improve the public schools, just as the entry of Federal Express and DHL into the package-delivery market forced the U.S. Postal Service to lower its costs and offer new services, such as Express Mail. Few analysts expected the Postal Service to be able to compete with its new rivals, yet several decades later it is a worthy opponent. Supporters of school choice believe that public school administrators and teachers would respond with equal vigor to the prospect of seeing their students and funding walk out the front door. Their professional pride and livelihood in jeopardy, they would work harder, adopt more effective curricula, hire more talented staff, and turn the district office into more of a support center than a maker and enforcer of rules. They would be spurred to innovate in ways that improve student achievement and parental satisfaction. Competition would be the proverbial rising tide that lifts all boats.

Would it be too much to ask Warren Bolton to familiarize himself with the most prominent previous arguments before weighing in?

A Poor Excuse for a Newspaper

In the first section of Wednesday's edition of The State--presumably devoted to the most important news--there are 11 stories that come from wire services like the Associated Press. By contrast, there is only one story (and one sidebar) that was actually written by Columbia's finest "reporters."

Is this really journalism? It seems like it's one step above plagiarism.