<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Times&#8217; not-so-full disclosure</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dankennedy.net/2010/03/21/the-times-not-so-full-disclosure/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2010/03/21/the-times-not-so-full-disclosure/</link>
	<description>By Dan Kennedy • The press, politics, technology, culture and other passions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 19:09:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Jones</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2010/03/21/the-times-not-so-full-disclosure/comment-page-1/#comment-56230</link>
		<dc:creator>William Jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:28:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=7523#comment-56230</guid>
		<description>Did Mr. Kennedy or any of the several commenters on his note concerning Mr. Holtz-Eakin&#039;s opinion piece regarding  the economics of the health care legislation enacted by the Democratic congress and signed by President Obama actually read the article?  The bias of Mr. Kennedy and the first four commenters say nothing to indicate that they read the article or thought about the validity of the arguments.
They seem to assume the CBO scoring magically removes costs and increases revenues.  Mr. Holtz-Eakin, as a former CBO director, certainly should be respected when he says that the real costs of the legislation are substantially in excess of the CBO evaluation, since that evaluation is narrow and short term in focus and since this legislation sets up large new entitlement programs, uses non-health care revenues (from student loan programs) to offset health care costs, and front loads revenues.  I think it is wonderful, if unexpected, that the NY Times printed Mr. Holtz-Eakin&#039;s article.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did Mr. Kennedy or any of the several commenters on his note concerning Mr. Holtz-Eakin&#8217;s opinion piece regarding  the economics of the health care legislation enacted by the Democratic congress and signed by President Obama actually read the article?  The bias of Mr. Kennedy and the first four commenters say nothing to indicate that they read the article or thought about the validity of the arguments.<br />
They seem to assume the CBO scoring magically removes costs and increases revenues.  Mr. Holtz-Eakin, as a former CBO director, certainly should be respected when he says that the real costs of the legislation are substantially in excess of the CBO evaluation, since that evaluation is narrow and short term in focus and since this legislation sets up large new entitlement programs, uses non-health care revenues (from student loan programs) to offset health care costs, and front loads revenues.  I think it is wonderful, if unexpected, that the NY Times printed Mr. Holtz-Eakin&#8217;s article.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BP Myers</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2010/03/21/the-times-not-so-full-disclosure/comment-page-1/#comment-55861</link>
		<dc:creator>BP Myers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 11:32:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=7523#comment-55861</guid>
		<description>@Aaron said: Will someone explain to me how the NYTimes DIDN’T at least say “a CONSERVATIVE policy institute?

Funny how conservative outlets have no qualms about calling things the way they see them. I was listening to a conservative talkradio station yesterday afternoon not long after Stupak and his cohort came out in favor of the healthcare bill. Their news began: &quot;A group of self-described pro-life Democrats have announced . . .&quot;

Because they can&#039;t &lt;i&gt;really&lt;/i&gt; be &quot;pro-life&quot; if they voted for this bill now, can they?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Aaron said: Will someone explain to me how the NYTimes DIDN’T at least say “a CONSERVATIVE policy institute?</p>
<p>Funny how conservative outlets have no qualms about calling things the way they see them. I was listening to a conservative talkradio station yesterday afternoon not long after Stupak and his cohort came out in favor of the healthcare bill. Their news began: &#8220;A group of self-described pro-life Democrats have announced . . .&#8221;</p>
<p>Because they can&#8217;t <i>really</i> be &#8220;pro-life&#8221; if they voted for this bill now, can they?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron Read</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2010/03/21/the-times-not-so-full-disclosure/comment-page-1/#comment-55854</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron Read</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 03:01:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=7523#comment-55854</guid>
		<description>@ BP Myers:  &lt;I&gt;Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who was the director of the Congressional Budget Office from 2003 to 2005, is the president of the American Action Forum, a policy institute.&lt;/I&gt;

I&#039;ve never worked at a newspaper before, only radio news outlets.  Will someone explain to me how the NYTimes DIDN&#039;T at least say &quot;a CONSERVATIVE policy institute&quot;?  I mean, that is pretty horrible editing right there...if that kind of omission was made in my (radio station&#039;s) newsroom, I&#039;d fire the reporter.

Granted my reporters are all undergrad students...but still!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ BP Myers:  <i>Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who was the director of the Congressional Budget Office from 2003 to 2005, is the president of the American Action Forum, a policy institute.</i></p>
<p>I&#8217;ve never worked at a newspaper before, only radio news outlets.  Will someone explain to me how the NYTimes DIDN&#8217;T at least say &#8220;a CONSERVATIVE policy institute&#8221;?  I mean, that is pretty horrible editing right there&#8230;if that kind of omission was made in my (radio station&#8217;s) newsroom, I&#8217;d fire the reporter.</p>
<p>Granted my reporters are all undergrad students&#8230;but still!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Al Quint</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2010/03/21/the-times-not-so-full-disclosure/comment-page-1/#comment-55840</link>
		<dc:creator>Al Quint</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 16:43:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=7523#comment-55840</guid>
		<description>the LIBERAL NY Times? Say it ain&#039;t so</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the LIBERAL NY Times? Say it ain&#8217;t so</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BP Myers</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2010/03/21/the-times-not-so-full-disclosure/comment-page-1/#comment-55836</link>
		<dc:creator>BP Myers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 14:06:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=7523#comment-55836</guid>
		<description>Hilarious. What did they use as his short bio? Lemme guess:

&lt;i&gt;Douglas Holtz-Eakin is a concerned citizen.&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hilarious. What did they use as his short bio? Lemme guess:</p>
<p><i>Douglas Holtz-Eakin is a concerned citizen.</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Served from: www.dankennedy.net @ 2012-02-09 14:12:52 -->
