New York's Best Newspaper May Close

Although I spend only two weekdays in Manhattan during the school year and fewer during breaks, I subscribe to the New York Sun. As well, I have bought a subscription for my mother who lives in the boroughs. The Sun is the very best newspaper I have ever seen, and the only one I have ever cared about. Sadly the paper may close at the end of this month. The courageous editor, Seth Lipsky, wrote about the paper's prospects today. If you live in New York, please consider subscribing. It's the best journalistic bang for the buck I have ever read. It would be wrenching to see the only high-quality conservative daily in the city to disappear. Mr. Lipsky wrote:

"This morning I write to you about the future of The New York Sun, which is in circumstances that may require us to cease publication at the end of September unless we succeed in our efforts to find additional financial backing. The managing editor, Ira Stoll, who is one of the founding partners in the paper, and I have shared this news with our colleagues, and we would like our readers as well to be aware of the situation.

"When we launched this business in October 2001 and began publishing the daily newspaper on April 16, 2002, it was with two goals. There was an editorial — an idealistic — goal of providing an alternative to the New York Times in coverage of New York City, politics, foreign policy, and culture. And there was a financial goal of making a profit. We have always been, and still are, of the view that the paper needs to achieve both goals to be a success.

"After more than six years of publication, the Sun is now at a crossroads. It has succeeded in establishing journalistic credibility and a reputation for quality and verve, and in becoming a part of the local, national, and international conversation. It is read daily by tens of thousands of New Yorkers, including the political, policy, and cultural leadership in the city. It is read in the nation's capital — in the White House, the Congress, and in the foreign chancelleries. Newspapers and Web sites in the city and around the world follow our scoops, quote our editorials, refer to our cultural criticism, and analyze our sports coverage.

"Even many who disagree with the views of our editorial page enjoy reading the Sun. "A fabulous read for culture," is the way it was described in the Nation. David Remnick of the New Yorker sent a note to say how much he admired what we are doing with the Sun, which he called "just plain good." He added: "OK, I agree with about ten percent of your editorials, but so what. ... I'm a lot happier, and richer, for having faced the Sun in the a.m."

Read the whole thing here. The Sun is a major force for a better New York and better America. Please subscribe.

Contrairimairi On Obamastick

Mitchell,
I believe the "MSM" (ooooooh how I HATE that acronym!) has missed the boat on the "lipstick on a pig" statement from BO. He did use the phrase appropriately, but if you watch his "body language" as he begins, you can see he seems clearly distressed over what is coming. The comment was being used to garner the exact reaction that it got, if you ask me. He KNEW the audience would take it for something other than the familiar phrase, and their reaction shows they DID. It was immediately perceived as a response to Sarah Palin, and the laughter and applause were the "knee-jerk" reaction, I believe, the use was meant to evoke. Technically, he did use the phrase to compare Bush and McCain's policies, but the "intent" to smear, I believe, was what he was going for, and subsequently GOT!
He can "say" that he was not referring to Sarah Palin as a "pig", and technically he would be correct, but he took this just one step too far! KNOWING that everyone present would be familiar with her speech line, I truly believe he deliberately, if hesitantly, used the line to smear her. I'll bet, as he rubbed his head, he was PRAYING his argument would be strong enough for the line not to backfire.........WRONG! Women SHOULD be furious over his repeated demeaning of all women by demeaning Hillary and Sarah.
I was particularly worried by Joe Biden's words, however, when he stated how capable and experienced Hillary was, and how she would have made a GREAT VP pick. Are we about to see BO's next "flip-flop"? Will he dump Biden and choose Hillary? Afterall, for BO, second place is NOT good enough. All that really matters to him is gaining the Presidency. I believe he will do anything he deems necessary to make sure that happens. Wouldn't it be a riot if he had already asked Hillary before she agreed to head to Florida for him? Wouldn't it be a bigger riot if she told him where to stuff his VP position????? LOL!
Any thoughts?
Mairi

My response:

I agree with you completely and am posting your message on my blog as the official position of "Mitchell Langbert's Blog"! BO got away with seeming like a saintly angel of "change" during the primary, but now that he is getting fair scrutiny from Fox and people like you his true nature is being clarified. I sensed that he is a rotten apple back in June when I called him a "sociopath". I stand by that characterization as a good approximation. He is certainly crude and aggressive beneath that charming exterior.

We will see about the Hillary for VP picture. I wonder if she would really reject it given how power hunger she is. But it's certainly possible, and perhaps likely. It's going to be interesting!

Howard Roark and the Ghost of Admiral Rickover

A teaching case that I co-authored with Mike Stanchina and Don Grunewald of Iona College was published in volume 15, no. 2 of Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal this past May. Mike Stanchina is a former student at the NYU Stern School of Business and he was an officer in the Nuclear Navy before attending NYU.

Title: Howard Roark and the ghost of Admiral Rickover
Author(s): Mitchell Langbert, Michael Stanchina, Donal Grunewald
Journal: Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal
Year: 2008
Volume: 15
Issue: 2
Page: 194 - 216
ISSN: 1352-7606
DOI: 10.1108/13527600810870624
Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Abortion As Art

Candace de Russy has blogged about a gruesome tale of academic horror. A Yale student induced miscarriages on herself and aimed to use the foetal remains as art. Her professor, Pia Lindman, was reprimanded but not fired. (At other institutions professors who glanced at a member of the opposite sex have been put up on charges, interrogated by Yale's thought police committee and fired. At Sarah Lawrence College, where I attended, in the early 1990s a student was thrown out of school for laughing at a joke about gays. But at Yale, the execution and use of human tissue for art is a matter for mild reprimand.)

De Russy discusses performance art, body art (the use of one's own body as art) and the rotten standards in today's university art and literature departments. She conclude:

"Yale’s failure to prevent Lindman and her kind from influencing impressionable undergraduates is testament to the university’s slavish cowardice in the face of a decadent and destructive ideological fashion."