Follow the money. It's the only reliable source for political and social science reporting. I'd love to see a publication that does nothing but print charts and graphs of the political flow of money, regardless of the particular ideology behind it.

Another great piece on Phil Jones by Marc Sheppard over on American Thinker:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/climategates_phil_jones_confes.html

"a discordant anvil chorus on which the editors and their feeders daily grind some very dull axes."

I had to read that discordant sentence several times to catch the humor in it (smile).

Take no prisoners, Gerard - put the hammer down on these guys! Revkin and the people who put over this fraud on the American taxpayer, with the connivance of the UN, must pay for their crimes and go to jail. I want my tax money back!

Dear Mr. Vanderleun: Good stuff. You wonder at the witlessness of the TIMES, persistently pushing away all this awful reality. A year ago, I would have said Sulzberger was angling for a bailout by The Once. That's still possible, but unless it happens quick, The Once won't be able to bail them out. Does Sulzberger really think the Internet is going to go away, and life'll like it was for the TIMES in the 80s and 90s, when the TIMES could concentrated on kidney punching the GOP to the happy exclusion of all else?

I offer a possibility for a legally trained AMERICAN DIGEST reader. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires officers of publicly traded companies to sign financial reports, and material omissions or inaccuracies can expose said officers to personal liability. I wish a lawyer skilled in Sarbox law would examine the companies Good Al Gore has been involved with as he grabs for his billion. If the floating/financing of said companies relied on the IPCC reports, there's a chance Good Al would be liable under Sarbox. There's no chance in hell that the Holder Justice Dept. would prosecute, but civil suits are possible. Let Good Al pay out his millions to his scurvy lawyers and maybe some to the investors he's swindled.

Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster

It's

1. Laziness
2. Incompetence
3. Bias
4. Collusion

Take your pick.

Glenn - How about "All of the above"?

The worth of a good reputation is known once you lose it. Which is why most corporations protect their brands with the ferocity of a grizzly bear with a sore tooth protecting her cubs.

For some reason, the NYT is not so inclined.