tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7313509.post108787521176066769..comments2023-11-05T03:29:20.511-05:00Comments on Mr Furious: War: We Can(t) Rebuild Him...Mr Furioushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03781439243585972721noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7313509.post-1087915551793934492004-06-22T09:45:00.000-05:002004-06-22T09:45:00.000-05:00It may have been a "Health" article, and was categ...It may have been a "Health" article, and was categorized as such online, but the reason I knew about it was walking past the paper on the newsstand. It was above-the-fold on the front page.<br /><br />Human interest stories are fine. So are optimistic, feel-good stories. My point is that the article had no balance, it wasn't really a profile, and its front page treatment should (to me) require it to present a more complete picture.<br /><br />It's not <I>always</I> political with me, but sometimes it's more fun that way. Of course since I saw it on the same day that Congress voted to uphold the ban on casket photos it didn't help my attitude any.Mr Furioushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03781439243585972721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7313509.post-1087910235810294062004-06-22T08:17:00.000-05:002004-06-22T08:17:00.000-05:00I'll be the first to comment. First of all, I hope...I'll be the first to comment. First of all, I hope Mrs. Furious won't be too furious about this blog. <br /><br />The Times article was in the Health section, so it wasn't there to talk about the political aspect of Iraq. Rather, Iraq was just a background setting to be able to talk about artificial limbs. Discussing the mangitude of the casualties in total and their treatment would move the article into a place that the writer was not comfortable with. After all, the point of the article was "look at these cool new limbs!"<br /><br />Jeez, does everything have to be political with you :-)<br /><br />TonyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com