»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Welcome to Gov't TakeOver #....Who's Counting?
| The Alley |
|
Welcome to Gov't TakeOver #....Who's Counting? |
|
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA 
|
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama prepared Tuesday to sign the piece of his sweeping health care overhaul that makes the government the primary lender to students and strips banks of that power. Obama has touted the changes as a way to make college more affordable for students and their debt load more manageable after graduation. He used his weekend radio and Internet address to cite expected benefits for young people: more student lending, caps on those repayments and more money for minority colleges and universities.http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100330/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama_student_loans |
||
| © Copyright 2010 Michael Mack - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Just another redistribution of wealth measure. [This message has been edited by Denise (03-30-2010 09:42 AM).] |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
I read the article you quoted, Mike. No place in that article did Mr Elliott make any reference at all to minority colleges and universities. You placed that reference to Mr. Elliot's Article in Boldface. I found that reference in a response to the article by a blogger, below. It was clearly signed by that blogger and not by Mr. Elliot, under whose signature the AP article was published. I want to know why you would 1) include the work of somebody else in your report of an article clearly signed by a reporter writing for The AP; 2) Exclude the name of the blogger whose name did appear over the phrase you did use, and whose work it was; and, 3) place that phrase in boldface as though it were the emphasized work of the author of the original AP article, MR. Elliot. The point of the article by Mr. Elliot was clear, straightforward and objective. With your alterations, the intention and the information in that article was substantially altered from that of the original. Your use of boldface should have carried the note, in brackets, [emphasis added by this author"] to avoid the confusion. Or at least something to make clear that you were making an addition and an editorial comment to the man's original and copyrighted work. It's not your intellectual property that you were monkeying around with, Mike. Maybe Mr. Elliot would not care, but no matter how you feel about President Obama, your wish to characterize him in this way does a certain disservice to the clear and straightforward writing of the AP article. And your Quotation of the whole piece as being part of that article when part is the work of a journalist and part is the work of a blogger commenting on that article is blandly misleading. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
Bob, I’m a little disappointed with your last post, I’m normally impressed with the research you do to ensure all your little ducks are in a row before you comment but in this case more than a couple of them are a little out of line. The original article did contain the text that Mike quoted – I read it before it was edited. Here's another version closer to the original: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100327/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama_student_loans Granted the text wasn’t a true representation of what Obama actually said, which is probably why it was edited out in the revised version, but there’s no denying that it was there. That isn’t what disappointed me though, you weren’t to know that the article had been edited, what disappointed me was the way that you automatically presumed that Mike was somehow making it up to fabricate a point. Mike doesn’t escape my disappointment either, he made the same error that you did, he took what he saw at face value without validating what he was reading before taking a swing. Ironically if Mike had gone back to the original source – Obama’s radio address – he could still have made his point and probably with more impact. Obama actually said: “This legislation also increases support for our minority serving institutions including our historically black colleges and universities” http://multimedia.wcbs880.com/m/audio/29994244/president-s-radio-addres s-march-27-2010.htm?pageid=29096 . |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
what disappointed me was the way that you automatically presumed that Mike was somehow making it up to fabricate a point. I see nothing surprising there. That's SOP. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
To be fair Mike I don’t believe that’s true. In the vast majority of cases Bob treats the links you post correctly – as other peoples interpretations of the truth - and attempts to lay the blame for any fabrication at the door of the originator rather than yours. That’s why this stood out so much and why I was so disappointed, it wasn’t what I’d normally expect from him, if this was the norm I wouldn’t have even bothered to mention it. . |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Ah, I wish that were true, mr. grinch. If I had time right now I would go through the threads and give various examples to prove my point but I don't. The comments about my fabrications, misrepresentations, and just plain making things up have been well-documented. As I said, it's nothing new. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Beg your pardon, Mr. Grinch, but Mike was quoting from a named source. I didn't choose his citation; he did. He quoted the Phillip Elliott AP article as the source. He did not credit the blogger as the source of the words, giving Mr. Elliot's imprimatur to the blogger's words. Not even in your version of the article did those words appear in the Phillip Elliott text. Instead of offering a fair summary of what Mr. Elliott did in fact say, Mike substituted somebody else's words for Mr. Elliott's much more evenhanded version of things. It was a complete distortion version of Mr. Elliott's article. Should Mike have wished to quote from the Radio Address and Monkey with the President's words, the offense would have been different. I had not heard the Radio Address, and wouldn't have been in fact surprised to hear the President make such remarks. I was very surprised top find that the AP had placed such words in Boldface, which is why I checked on the reference in the first place. Boldface is generally reserved for giving emphasis to text, and journalists know enough to source whose emphasis the boldface reflects. I was not surprised to find that Mike had added his own boldface without noting his anti-Presidential editorial emphasis. I was surprised to find that Mike had chosen to put somebody else's words into Mr. Elliott's mouth, destroy the fairly reasoned set of points that Mr. Elliott was making, and then to substitute the unsourced blogger's words as though they had come from the professional journalist. I was also not surprised to find Mike claiming blandly in the posting after your comment, that I fault him for acting this way frequently, and suggesting that such behavior is perfectly aboveboard. Only if you want to edit Mike's poetry to fit into a collection of Liberal voices against the Right and sign his name to it. I am disappointed that you are disappointed in me about this, Mr. Grinch. I usually find you quite objective. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Well, at any rate, the topic has been hijacked once again, and ignored, so I suppose all went according to plan. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
Bob, My disappointment is growing.  The original article contained the text exactly as Mike quoted – I know that because I read it several times shortly after Mike posted because I was going to mention that the quote in the article wasn’t actually what the President had said. It was then edited several times during the day – I supplied a link to one version that, if you read it you’ll find contains this: “the president cited expected benefits for young people: more student lending, caps on those repayments and more money for minority colleges and universities.” By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer Philip Elliott, Associated Press Writer – Sat Mar 27, 10:52 am ET They'd replaced touted with cited by that point but you get the drift. Mike, What topic? You posted a link to a badly written article if you give me an idea what point you were trying to make in doing that I’ll be happy to comment. . |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Ok, my point was pointing out yet another government takeover of a private business, another addition to a constantly- growing list. Is this good? Is this the direction we want to be heading in? It is obviously a way of channeling more money to the government to be used in the health care bill. There have already been reports of layoffs that are occuring and will further occur in the banking sector. The student loans can be forgiven after 20 years, instead of 25. Is this another way of showing people how they can avoid personal responsibilities? There is also a stipulation that student loans that go toward a career in public service, i.e. government jobs, can be forgiven much earlier. Is this the right path? |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
"President Obama signed the health care reform bill [last] Tuesday. He's taken over the auto industry, banking industry and health care industry. As a child he used to play Monopoly by seizing the box and accusing the other children of scare tactics." --comedian Argus Hamilton |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Mr. G. Your version would have been a vast improvement. It restores some of the evenhndedness of Mr. Elliott's article, and it deletes the distressing boldface, no place to be found in Mr. Elliott's article. It leaves the impression that what Mr. Obama has done is solely for the benefit of minority colleges. The suggestion that the government should take the risk of guarenteeing the federal loans to students and allow the banks to make the profits from them may sound like a government takeover to Mike. To me it sounds like corporate welfare, where the taxpayers take the risks and the banks get to cherry-pick the profits as a nice gift for no risks at all. Of course, the banks are distressed. The government has realized that they can hold on to tax-payer money that they've been giving away to the banks, and make it go further at no extra risk. This is what we've hired the government for, isn't it? To manage the tyxpayer money wisely and not throw it away? |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: But it isn’t – the Government hasn’t taken over any business – they’ve simply opened a new one of their own. At present the students get loans from banks and the government signs as guarantor in case the student defaults, the banks set the interest rate and repayment period which means that the students end up paying back the loans for 25 years while the banks skim the interest as profit. Under the new system the Government will lend the money directly to the students, they’ll charge a lower interest rate than the banks were willing to offer so the students pay off the loan in 20 instead of 25 years and they use the interest to fund Pell grants and other education related schemes. It’s an excellent idea, they should have done the same thing with health care to avoid the shortfall in Medicare funding. . |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
