Robert Reich and David Brooks Opine Without support.

I read the editorial opinions at the back of the newspaper. Do you?

If you do, then you are no doubt as disappointed as I am. The writing is wonderful and the editorialists, such as Robert Reich or David Brooks can turn a clever phrase like a well designed race car gracefully turns a sharply banked curve. But when the phrase turning is over, the editorials lack evidence to support the opining. For example, recently I read, studied if you will, editorials by Reich and Brooks.

Reich first. His title was " More evidence we must break up big banks." I carefully examined each of his 500 word editorial and I could find no evidence to support his title. He asserted that the large global banks have all conspired to control interest rates and as a result have ripped off trillions of dollars from people like you and me. His example of this massive grift was the allegations, currently filling the financial news, that Barclay's Bank was controlling interest rates in London in deference to their own profits. Without offering any specific evidence, Reich makes a giant leap for the world and induces that we must break up the big banks to avoid more "abuses," which he also fails to enumerate.

Next to Reich's column was 500 words by David Brooks. His title was "A split that foreshadows America's national suicide." His editorial was even more void of evidence to support his title than Reich's. Let me summarize Brooks' editorial. Rich kids have more advantages than less rich kids. College educated parents read to their children more than parents who did not attend college.  Rich kids play more after school sports than less rich kids. And the Reich-like giant leap forward; if America does not change this unacceptable situation, then "The alternative is national suicide." Not only does national suicide defy reasonable explanation, but it is unnecessary hyperbole for an editorial that should be rational, educational and thoughtful rather than reckless, defenseless and careless.

Lest I am accused of being guilty of that which I opine about, let me conclude with a simple suggestion that you examine a few editorials and make your own independent determination.

I guess what bothers me the most is they get paid to opine without evidence.