The new standard of the NY Times: Same as everyone else - Complete bullshit

I just finished an article from the New York Times regarding the affordability of housing across the country and I must confess that I am now very close to writing off this newspaper that I once thought rather highly of. It would seem that the Times has reduced itself to shoveling out the same kind of bullshit that most of us have come to expect from places like Fox News.

The article goes on to compare housing costs of today with those of 20 years ago when interest rates were among the highest in history and makes the claim that housing today is more affordable overall. In other words, they're still trying to perpetuate the over-inflated housing market that is being almost solely driven by continued low interest rates.

Now most b.s. stories rely on ommission or slanting of facts and figures to make their point, but what is interesting to point out in this case is that the article presents all the facts needed to come to the definitive conclusion that the writer is full of SHIT!!

For whomever is interested, here is a link to the article in question:
http://nytimes.com/2005/12/29/realestate/29afford.html?hp&ex=1135918800&en=915d811937ffbff1&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Long story short, it points out that a particualr survey found that on average American families are devoting about 23% of the "family" income to paying their mortgages. This is cited as being better than the 30+% that was being devoted to the cause in the 80s. However, note the use of the term family income. We all know that the number of families that are dual and even triple income families has skyrocketed over the past 20 years. Keep this in mind for the next part.

The article later cites that the average salary has also risen on average by about 50%. This is where you should start scratching your head. If most families are, in fact, two income households, then that would mean that American families should have roughly 100% more income than they did in the 80s. I can buy that part. What stumps me is how those same families are only managing to divert a meager 7% or so more away from their mortgage payments.

Furthermore, the article points out that places like California, New York, and Washington are notable exceptions to the trend as skyrocketing prices there are consuming about half of family incomes and people there are making even more money!!!

Last but not least, this bonehead also has the nerve to claim that people are getting more house for their money these days because the houses they are buying are generally bigger than in past years. Boy, people really do have short memories. In the past generations, when you bought a house, you usually bought it along with this stuff we like to call land, and believe it not the land was what held the real value, and not the stupid house sitting on it.

As usual, I could go on for quite a while shooting holes in this blatant attempt to further the economy at the expense of poor young couples trying to get their lives started the right way and not neck deep in debt, but I think you all get the point.

The obvious message here is to mind what you read and if you have a subscription to the NY Times, CANCEL IT!!!

New York finally achieves it's own orbit!

New Yorkers (city and state) have long since been known for being on a slightly different wavelength than the rest of the planet, but recent events seem to indicate that they have indeed achieved an orbit entirely separate from the rest of us.

The most prominent of these events is the Transit Union Workers strike, which is now in it's second day. Here are a bunch of geniuses who think they're going to get more money out of a city that is going to lose millions this holiday season because them striking, thus prohibiting thousands of people from getting to their favorite shopping destinations. If a union wants to organize a strike, fine; but at least consider a few of the basic rules of economics before you do it.

Of course, we also have the New York Times fiasco that was discussed in the previous post - nothing more need be said on that.

They elected a woman as Senator (The dishonorable Ms. Clinton) who probably couldn't tell you what the various subway lines in the city are nor much else about the rest of the state. By the way, thanks for legitimizing her entry into the national political stage. She'll more than likely pave the way for another Republican administration unless Ross Perot decides it's time to run for President - again; then we're really in deep shit because she might actually win!

They keep going to overpriced ball games as George Steinbrenner is creating a payroll that should soon put ticket prices on par with airfare to most major U.S. cities.

After 4 years of bickering over designs, they still can't decide on how to build a new World Trade Center. Here's a suggestion - try a referendum before the 10 year mark comes and ground hasn't been broken yet. Hell, let Trump build his design if you have to. Just start building something up already before the 9/11 generation is too senile to appreciate it.

Earth to New York, Earth to New York, come in New York! We're losing you!

We Didn't Elect the NYT Editor

Despite being a semi-avid reader of the New York Times and long-time fan of its reporting style, I have to say that I am severely disappointed in the lack of proper judgement shown by its editor in running the story about eavesdropping being done by the NSA without a court order.

Whether the activity was right or wrong, constitutional or unconstitutional, it was part of activities that are directly assciated with national security and that makes reporting on those activities without consent of the government totally improper and illegal. As we speak, the Justice Department should be assessing whether this man can be brought up on charges of treason.

Now that sounds pretty intense to most people reading this, I'm sure. However , this is how it is. The Editor-in-Chief of the New York Times was not elected to his position by the people of this country nor was he appointed by anyone that was elected for the purpose of safeguarding this nation's security. Therefore, he did not possess the authority to make a decision that can directly affect our national security.

Once again, whether or not George W. Bush was doing the right thing in authorizing these wiretaps without a court order is not what I'm talking about here. This administration isn't the first to ask the press to play hush in certain instances and it won't be the last.This is about who has the authority to act on issues of national security.

Apparently, the Times waited for about a year before deciding to run this story, despite calls from the government not to run it when the information was first available; that in itself tells you that there was doubt as to whether this was the right thing to do.

This tells me that the Times was waiting for the right time to run the story, perhaps hoping that they might strike the decisive blow to any GOP hopes of holding onto the White House and Congressional majorities in 2008. If this is true, it makes the activity even more deplorable and more worthy of punishment.

Some people should be getting locked up over this, no doubt about it.

More at last: Insanity, that is.

After taking a short hiatus from the art of rant in an effort to balance myself a little, I am back with a vengence on the heels of a story about more adopted kids being tortured. The latest from cnn.com:

NORWALK, Ohio (AP) -- Child-welfare workers had heard rumors that a couple kept some of their 11 adopted children in cages two years before the youngsters were removed from the home, a witness testified in a custody hearing Tuesday.
Officials tried to follow up on the rumors in 2003, but Michael and Sharen Gravelle would not cooperate and a full investigation was never conducted, said Jo Ellen Johnson, an investigator for the Huron County Department of Job and Family Services.
The children were finally taken from the Gravelles after Johnson visited the home and examined the chicken-wire cages.
"They were piled one on top of another. It looked like a kennel," Johnson said.

It seems we have yet another state in our fine Union that probably spends more on shining the floors of their State Capitol Building than they do on their so-called Dept. of Family Services. Notice in this case that it's Dept. of Job and Family Services; that means that instead of just having half a dozen people working hundreds of family case files, like most other states, these half dozen also have to not only keep a bunch of losers from abusing their kids, but also find jobs for them. Can you say 'recipe for alcoholic state workers'?

So now what? We keep hearing these ghastly stories about kids being tortured, but the next day the story is gone and it's back to the everyday topic of how terrorists are being tortured. Indeed, it isn't right for anyone to be tortured, but it's also not right that they these few get the attention that our nation's foster children should be getting.

We've got parents locking up and beating the crap out of helpless kids that they're being paid to take care of and the window-licking morons of the press and all these civil rights groups are more worried about terrorists! How about we worry about the rights of this country's children for more than 5 minutes? Where is the Congressional probe into the ability of our state governments to protect the Constitutional rights of Amercian foster kids?

It's a sad, sad state of affairs ladies and gentlemen. So much for balance. I can feel my ying trying to beat the crap out of my yang already.