this post isn’t really about either. the question is, why is it that had a female judge ruled last week that abortion were legal (or illegal) in the united states or any singular state, the u.s. media would be all a chatter (dare i say a-twitter) about the fact that a woman –a woman! had decided the case. a gay male judge has ruled that not allowing gay marriage is unconstitutional in the state of california. this news item has been routinely ignored by the american media. it took the economist –the economist a uk rag about ECONOMICS to post that btw, the judge is gay –in parentheses, no less. no wonder americans all read uk newspapers. isn’t this a historical something-or-nother. and had the people who put up the funds to fight the proposition had known, do you think they had saved their money? questions for historians. unless they decide to ignore this tidbit of history. well, lets hope that some of these historians double majored in ECONOMICS. 🙂
did you know that the guardian is the second most read english language newspaper in the world. and that it comes from a country with around 65M people (or something like that. might be more like 60M but can’t be bothered to look this up at the moment), while the u.s. has over 300M?