Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (140380)	9/25/2005 12:23:42 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793986

Looks more and more as if Calame had an agenda coming in. I have never dealt with anybody in my life that "ad hominem's" as much as you do.

To: JohnM who wrote (140380)	9/25/2005 12:26:14 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 793986

Looks more and more as if Calame had an agenda coming in. Sure he did. To get Krugman to stop lying in his columns and expect the Public Editor to cover for him.

To: JohnM who wrote (140380)	9/25/2005 9:10:25 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793986

It's trivial only if you think a major newspaper should trivilizie a fellow journalist's accusations of dishonesty. Heck, the dispute much like the vicious academic infighting I'm sure you saw in your day. I daresay you didn't consider that trivial. Where exactly would you draw the line? Rivera called the gal a Jayson Blair in skirts. Those are fighting words, I should think. Should we ignore Calame's findings? Dollars to doughnuts that you would be trumpeting the NYT's honesty on a point you'd characterize as important and certainly not trivial if the results of Calame's inquiry supported the paper's position.