NY Times in-house critic gets it just right

As NY Times public editor calls it a tenure (2 years of subjecting NYT stuff to his close scrutiny from within), he comes up with a very good short description of what happens when you put a bunch of contemporary libs together and give them a newspaper to run:

“When The Times covers a national presidential campaign, I have found that the lead editors and reporters are disciplined about enforcing fairness and balance, and usually succeed in doing so,” Brisbane writes in his final column. “Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times.”

It’s the air they breathe.  They are hopeless.  Time to break up the Times.

Management talks tough about pension plan

Here’s a neat statement about pension plans and, for that matter, most rich employee benefits or even social welfare programs:

[T]he most important thing we can do is to eliminate the expense, risk and volatility of the defined-benefit pension plans many of our employees have enjoyed over the years. . . .   They are great for employees, but they are, sadly, unaffordable.

Oh, that old affordability business.  Just like an employer, eh? 

In this case it’s New York Times management to its newspaper guild editorialists.  Like something out of the National Assn. of Manufacturers. 

Economics makes strange bedfellows, no?