There is no real middle between today's so-called conservatives and so-called liberals, other than those who feel caught between two extremes.
What we need is a party that determines what the real problems are and what real, possible solutions to those problems may be. Maybe this party should be called the Realistic Party, not to be confused with reality shows.
Of course, once a group has a name and real people start joining it, then the group starts moving from its original goals. Oh, well! I tried.
This entry was partially inspired by Ross Douthat's latest column, "Scenes from a Marriage", New York Times, 2011-01-16.
He writes about the mutual antipathy between "the media" and Sarah Palin, which Douthat writes is more co-dependence.
Based on his realistic look at the issue, I would say he might be an ideal spokesperson for the Realistic Party. On the other hand, does his over-generalization that some journalists are "the media" disqualify him from this role?
Showing posts with label Sarah Palin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sarah Palin. Show all posts
Monday, January 17, 2011
Friday, December 11, 2009
The Age of Unreason
Sarah Palin quit as governor to become a celebrity. Sarah Palin is a Republican. Therefore all Republicans want to become celebrities.
Bad reasoning? Yes, but it is exactly the type of reasoning Sarah Palin uses in her recent article, which I saw in yesterday's Star Tribune. The original article is "Copenhagen's political science", Sarah Palin, Washington Post, 2009-12-09.
She maintains that some scientists in England supposedly falsified data. These scientists are proponents of the idea of global warming. Therefore all scientists who are proponents of the idea of global warming have falsified data.
If you have time, follow the links from the Washington Post. You might be able to find the posted emails, judge for yourself if they all are real, and determine how much they "disprove" global warming, if at all.
For a more balanced view, see "Whose war on science?", Michael Gerson, Washington Post, 2009-12-11.
You also can find many interesting comments by following almost any link.
Before you judge "conservatives" too harshly, consider that many "liberals" take facts out of context to make a point. Sixty some million people do not have health insurance. Sixty some million people are in imminent danger of a health crisis. Sixty some million people will suffer greatly because they don't have health insurance. Yes, there are many people who will suffer because they don't have health insurance, but let's find other justifications for health care being available to all who need it.
Bad reasoning? Yes, but it is exactly the type of reasoning Sarah Palin uses in her recent article, which I saw in yesterday's Star Tribune. The original article is "Copenhagen's political science", Sarah Palin, Washington Post, 2009-12-09.
She maintains that some scientists in England supposedly falsified data. These scientists are proponents of the idea of global warming. Therefore all scientists who are proponents of the idea of global warming have falsified data.
If you have time, follow the links from the Washington Post. You might be able to find the posted emails, judge for yourself if they all are real, and determine how much they "disprove" global warming, if at all.
For a more balanced view, see "Whose war on science?", Michael Gerson, Washington Post, 2009-12-11.
You also can find many interesting comments by following almost any link.
Before you judge "conservatives" too harshly, consider that many "liberals" take facts out of context to make a point. Sixty some million people do not have health insurance. Sixty some million people are in imminent danger of a health crisis. Sixty some million people will suffer greatly because they don't have health insurance. Yes, there are many people who will suffer because they don't have health insurance, but let's find other justifications for health care being available to all who need it.
Monday, November 09, 2009
Arguments for new political parties
I've had in my notes for a week a couple of articles about this year's elections, but haven't taken the time to comment on them. This morning a change of plans had me staying at home, and I took the time to catch up. Catching up included scanning the New York Times web site for articles of interest. The first I chose was "Paranoia Strikes Deep", by Paul Krugman, New York Times, 2009-11-09. When I started to write a note about it, I rediscovered the two older opinion articles and the three seemed to tie together.
Ross Douthat is now the resident "conservative" at the New York Times, David Brooks apparently not being conservative enough. However, Douthat is not a conservative in the current sense, but an older, more respectable sense. Instead of saying no to anything "liberals" propose and adhering strictly to a set of conservative "principles", he says, "Wait a minute, let's think about this" and looks at issues from many perspectives.
Last week Douthat wrote "Three's Company", about the governor's race in New Jersey and the Congressional race in New York. He praised the "spoilers" for shaking things up. He wrote that we need more third parties to break up the corruption of one-party states (both red and blue) and the inertia caused by an intransigent minority. He hoped that new local parties would emerge that would address local issues locally rather than along national fault lines.
David Brooks, "What independents want", New York Times, 2009-11-06, wrote that independents want stability. Independents are moving to the right because they don't see government solving the problems that affect their lives. This should not be seen as a ray of hope for Republicans except in that independents will most likely give less support to Democrats. Brooks didn't write it, but I wonder if too many independents stay home when they are unhappy rather than vote against the party in power. I wonder what would happen if these unhappy independents voted with blank ballots instead of staying home. Or better yet, if a new moderate party arose that promised more stability.
Paul Krugman wrote that the paranoiacs have essentially taken over the Republican Party. Newt Gingrich is now a voice of moderation but he has no power. The power resides in, surprise, the media - Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sarah Palin. The result will be that we have "a rump party with no interest in actually governing" but enough power to prevent anybody else from governing.
I think Douthat is on to something. Instead of looking for new parties to start at the top around some popular figure like Colin Powell, we need to have parties start around local and state issues. Jesse Ventura did it once; can someone else do it with more pragmatic issues. "Rest assured", we really do need more choice in politics.
Ross Douthat is now the resident "conservative" at the New York Times, David Brooks apparently not being conservative enough. However, Douthat is not a conservative in the current sense, but an older, more respectable sense. Instead of saying no to anything "liberals" propose and adhering strictly to a set of conservative "principles", he says, "Wait a minute, let's think about this" and looks at issues from many perspectives.
Last week Douthat wrote "Three's Company", about the governor's race in New Jersey and the Congressional race in New York. He praised the "spoilers" for shaking things up. He wrote that we need more third parties to break up the corruption of one-party states (both red and blue) and the inertia caused by an intransigent minority. He hoped that new local parties would emerge that would address local issues locally rather than along national fault lines.
David Brooks, "What independents want", New York Times, 2009-11-06, wrote that independents want stability. Independents are moving to the right because they don't see government solving the problems that affect their lives. This should not be seen as a ray of hope for Republicans except in that independents will most likely give less support to Democrats. Brooks didn't write it, but I wonder if too many independents stay home when they are unhappy rather than vote against the party in power. I wonder what would happen if these unhappy independents voted with blank ballots instead of staying home. Or better yet, if a new moderate party arose that promised more stability.
Paul Krugman wrote that the paranoiacs have essentially taken over the Republican Party. Newt Gingrich is now a voice of moderation but he has no power. The power resides in, surprise, the media - Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sarah Palin. The result will be that we have "a rump party with no interest in actually governing" but enough power to prevent anybody else from governing.
I think Douthat is on to something. Instead of looking for new parties to start at the top around some popular figure like Colin Powell, we need to have parties start around local and state issues. Jesse Ventura did it once; can someone else do it with more pragmatic issues. "Rest assured", we really do need more choice in politics.
Sunday, August 02, 2009
Bill Maher makes a deal with "birthers"
Bill Maher took on those who insist President Obama is not an American on his HBO show.
At the end he offered to show the birthers President Obama's birth certificate when they show him Sarah Palin's high school diploma.
I wonder if the rush is on to get Sarah Palin's high school diploma. Gosh, can I even produce mine? I do know I have my B.A. and M.S. in a bookcase. But if I can't find my copy of Boccacio without turning the house upside down, could I find two little framed (I think framed) documents?
At the end he offered to show the birthers President Obama's birth certificate when they show him Sarah Palin's high school diploma.
I wonder if the rush is on to get Sarah Palin's high school diploma. Gosh, can I even produce mine? I do know I have my B.A. and M.S. in a bookcase. But if I can't find my copy of Boccacio without turning the house upside down, could I find two little framed (I think framed) documents?
Monday, July 13, 2009
A new third party coming?
Here is another forgotten thought. I am sure I saw an article two or three days ago headlined something like "Palin to start new party". I'm not sure if it was in the Huffington Post, the New York Times, or the Washington Post. Wherever it was, I can't find it in the first several dozen hits.
Now that is the good news! I get many, many hits on "new party", whether it is the hard-nosed conservatives leaving the Republican party or moderates leaving the Republican party.
Whichever way it goes, it can only be a plus for our country. If the hard-nosed conservatives leave the Republican Party, then more moderates will join it, even from the Democrats, and we may gain a truly pragmatic party. If the moderates leave to form a new party we may get the same result.
That result is that we may get a party that balances what needs to be done, what can be done, and what is consistent with our history and Constitution.
Now that is the good news! I get many, many hits on "new party", whether it is the hard-nosed conservatives leaving the Republican party or moderates leaving the Republican party.
Whichever way it goes, it can only be a plus for our country. If the hard-nosed conservatives leave the Republican Party, then more moderates will join it, even from the Democrats, and we may gain a truly pragmatic party. If the moderates leave to form a new party we may get the same result.
That result is that we may get a party that balances what needs to be done, what can be done, and what is consistent with our history and Constitution.
Friday, July 10, 2009
Who's impaling Palin?
Many are complaining that "The Media" are out to get Sarah Palin. My own take is that they are only reporting what she says and does. The more that gets reported, the more she goes on the defensive. When a politician goes on the defensive, a good reporter looks for what else may be going on.
When partisans of whatever stripe feel one of their own is being attacked, they too often gather in a circle and blame outsiders. Too rarely do they ask themselves what may be true about the reporting.
One partisan who did look more deeply into the Palin story, Peggy Noonan, wrote an opinion piece for a partisan media, The Wall Street Journal. See "A Farewell to Harms", Peggy Noonan, Wall Street Journal Online, 2009-07-10.
When partisans of whatever stripe feel one of their own is being attacked, they too often gather in a circle and blame outsiders. Too rarely do they ask themselves what may be true about the reporting.
One partisan who did look more deeply into the Palin story, Peggy Noonan, wrote an opinion piece for a partisan media, The Wall Street Journal. See "A Farewell to Harms", Peggy Noonan, Wall Street Journal Online, 2009-07-10.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Be careful what you ask for
A few days ago, Michael Gerson wrote that Obama is not reaching across the aisle as he promised ("The Most Polarizing President", Washington Post, 2009-04-07). It was reprinted in the Star Tribune on April 9. Today's Star Tribune had a couple of letters rebutting Gerson pointing out that it is some Republicans that are the polarizers. The moderate Republicans are far and few between.
As my wife and I discussed this, we brought up Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin, two very polarizing politicians. From there I went to those who think there should be more women in government. Since most of the people who tout this idea are liberals, are they so sure they would get more balanced politics.
Then we went on how once a seat has gone to a woman or a black, then the replacement should be the same gender or race. This notion had us go from Thurgood Marshall to Clarence Thomas.
My mind then went back to women in politics and Bachmann and Palin. Because they wear high heels doesn't give stature to their ideas.
As my wife and I discussed this, we brought up Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin, two very polarizing politicians. From there I went to those who think there should be more women in government. Since most of the people who tout this idea are liberals, are they so sure they would get more balanced politics.
Then we went on how once a seat has gone to a woman or a black, then the replacement should be the same gender or race. This notion had us go from Thurgood Marshall to Clarence Thomas.
My mind then went back to women in politics and Bachmann and Palin. Because they wear high heels doesn't give stature to their ideas.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Palin and Africa, who said what when?
Bob Lundegaard's letter ("The Palin Effect, McCain camp should have given her a map", Star Tribune, November 15, 2008) set off some alarms in my head, especially when he wrote about "the media" and even more so when he wrote about "the media elite".
I've written elsewhere that "the" is one of the most dangerous words in the English language, second only to "they". Too many people use "the" for sweeping generalizations about a particular group when it is really a few with whom they have a complaint. "The media" covers a wide variety of broadcasters, publishers, and bloggers. The opinions and skills of the people vary so greatly that one cannot really generalize. Can one lump Rush Limbaugh and Arianna Huffington together in "the media? Or a skilled writer like George Will with a ranting blogger who uses only ad hominem attacks?
Lundegaard complained that the timing of the release of the story about Palin and Africa confirms "people's suspicions that the media elite can't be trusted." I submit that the timing may have been because a certain news team could be trusted. However, to find this out, I had to spend more time than any of the online commenters to Lundegaard's letter seem to have spent.
The first inkling I got of a really big problem was when I saw CNET News item about a McCain advisor named Michael Eisenstadt claiming to leak the story to Fox News. This story was actually a New York Times story published in Arts and Entertainment, Nov. 12, "A Senior Fellow at the Institute of Nonexistence". The man posing as Eisenstadt said he really was not the leak.
I can't remember all the twists and turns of my search for the facts, but I did find two Fox News broadcasts on YouTube of interviews with Carl Cameron, Chief Political Correspondent for Fox News. These both took place on November 5, one on the late afternoon news and one on the Bill O'Reilly program. On both he mentions Palin not knowing Africa was a continent. He mentions no sources except in the first he says "McCain aides told me today..."
When I searched Fox News for "Palin Africa" I found 25 hits in the ranges May 5 to September 10, September 18 to October 26, and November 7 to November 16. Either Fox News' search software leaves gaps or Fox News has pulled certain pieces.
I did find a news recap that mentioned the Africa charge. Jane Hall said on Fox News Watch on November 8, "And Newsweek had it and Carl Cameron had it and Hugh Miller had it." I don't know who Hugh Miller is, but when I searched Newsweek for "Palin Africa" I had zero hits.
I also did a search of the Star Tribune and the New York Times. The Star Tribune has nothing on "Palin Africa" until Lundegaard's letter. The New York Times has six hits after the election. Four were by columnists who attributed the remark to Fox News or Carl Cameron or stated it was a contention, one was the story about the hoax, and the sixth was about Palin defending herself against the charge, "Palin Calls Criticism by McCain Aides 'Cruel and Mean-Spirited'", November 8. She is quoted as saying, “For the most part, absolutely, media persons, reporters, have been absolutely right on and there has been fairness and objectivity. There have been some stinkers, though..."
So, where does this "revelation" that Sarah Palin didn't know Africa was a continent come from. One could say that Carl Cameron made it up; Wikipedia says that he has fabricated stories in the past. One could also say that one remark by Palin has been blown out of proportion and context. Apparently she did have a discussion about South Africa and was unsure whether it was about South Africa the country or southern Africa the region. If this is so, we should cut her some slack. Whatever, Carl Cameron is not "the media".
Who is "the media, who agreed to hold the story until after the election"? Remember Jane Hall's comment about Newsweek and Carl Cameron? For many years, Newsweek has done "Secrets of the Campaign" reportage. They offer to document many of the behind the scenes events in exchange for the promise not to publish anything until after the election. I think they have gotten co-operation from both Republicans and Democrats for many elections. Newsweek isn't "the media" but they have shown they can be trusted. You can see dozens of clips of both the McCain and Obama campaigns that were not made available until November 5. You might enjoy them if you have a few days free.
See also "Palin and Africa, who said what when? Sources for article"
I've written elsewhere that "the" is one of the most dangerous words in the English language, second only to "they". Too many people use "the" for sweeping generalizations about a particular group when it is really a few with whom they have a complaint. "The media" covers a wide variety of broadcasters, publishers, and bloggers. The opinions and skills of the people vary so greatly that one cannot really generalize. Can one lump Rush Limbaugh and Arianna Huffington together in "the media? Or a skilled writer like George Will with a ranting blogger who uses only ad hominem attacks?
Lundegaard complained that the timing of the release of the story about Palin and Africa confirms "people's suspicions that the media elite can't be trusted." I submit that the timing may have been because a certain news team could be trusted. However, to find this out, I had to spend more time than any of the online commenters to Lundegaard's letter seem to have spent.
The first inkling I got of a really big problem was when I saw CNET News item about a McCain advisor named Michael Eisenstadt claiming to leak the story to Fox News. This story was actually a New York Times story published in Arts and Entertainment, Nov. 12, "A Senior Fellow at the Institute of Nonexistence". The man posing as Eisenstadt said he really was not the leak.
I can't remember all the twists and turns of my search for the facts, but I did find two Fox News broadcasts on YouTube of interviews with Carl Cameron, Chief Political Correspondent for Fox News. These both took place on November 5, one on the late afternoon news and one on the Bill O'Reilly program. On both he mentions Palin not knowing Africa was a continent. He mentions no sources except in the first he says "McCain aides told me today..."
When I searched Fox News for "Palin Africa" I found 25 hits in the ranges May 5 to September 10, September 18 to October 26, and November 7 to November 16. Either Fox News' search software leaves gaps or Fox News has pulled certain pieces.
I did find a news recap that mentioned the Africa charge. Jane Hall said on Fox News Watch on November 8, "And Newsweek had it and Carl Cameron had it and Hugh Miller had it." I don't know who Hugh Miller is, but when I searched Newsweek for "Palin Africa" I had zero hits.
I also did a search of the Star Tribune and the New York Times. The Star Tribune has nothing on "Palin Africa" until Lundegaard's letter. The New York Times has six hits after the election. Four were by columnists who attributed the remark to Fox News or Carl Cameron or stated it was a contention, one was the story about the hoax, and the sixth was about Palin defending herself against the charge, "Palin Calls Criticism by McCain Aides 'Cruel and Mean-Spirited'", November 8. She is quoted as saying, “For the most part, absolutely, media persons, reporters, have been absolutely right on and there has been fairness and objectivity. There have been some stinkers, though..."
So, where does this "revelation" that Sarah Palin didn't know Africa was a continent come from. One could say that Carl Cameron made it up; Wikipedia says that he has fabricated stories in the past. One could also say that one remark by Palin has been blown out of proportion and context. Apparently she did have a discussion about South Africa and was unsure whether it was about South Africa the country or southern Africa the region. If this is so, we should cut her some slack. Whatever, Carl Cameron is not "the media".
Who is "the media, who agreed to hold the story until after the election"? Remember Jane Hall's comment about Newsweek and Carl Cameron? For many years, Newsweek has done "Secrets of the Campaign" reportage. They offer to document many of the behind the scenes events in exchange for the promise not to publish anything until after the election. I think they have gotten co-operation from both Republicans and Democrats for many elections. Newsweek isn't "the media" but they have shown they can be trusted. You can see dozens of clips of both the McCain and Obama campaigns that were not made available until November 5. You might enjoy them if you have a few days free.
See also "Palin and Africa, who said what when? Sources for article"
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Palin and Africa, who said what when? Sources for article
I get a strong reaction when anybody writes about media bias. "The media" covers a wide range of skills and opinions. When I read "The Palin Effect: McCain camp should have given her a map" in the November 15 Star Tribune, I got busy at my keyboard. It took two days, but I churned out over 700 words of analysis looking for the "real" story about what Palin really said. I can't post it here unless the Star Tribune decides not to print my article. While we wait, you can "enjoy" some of the articles I used.
2008-11-05 Carl Cameron, Fox News, broadcast bit about Palin not knowing Africa is a continent. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWZHTJsR4Bc. No mention of source of information. Cameron does say, "McCain aides told me today" about Africa statement.
O'Reilly and Cameron
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1ktXKzT_gQ&NR=1 No mention of sources of information. Cameron does say that McCain staffers were met by Palin in a bathrobe.
2008-11-06 Palin-Africa Story Implodes Right Wing Media Cabal, Gawker, http://gawker.com/5077915/palin+africa-story-implodes-right-wing-media-cabal
2008-11-08 Fox News recap, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,449566,00.html, Newsweek, Cameron, and Hugh Miller "had it".
2008-11-08 Gail Collins writes that Carl Cameron of Fox News said Palin didn't know Africa was a continent. Collins includes that Palin says this is untrue. "A Political Manners Manual"
2008-11-08 Article on Palin reaction to criticism. “For the most part, absolutely, media persons, reporters, have been absolutely right on and there has been fairness and objectivity,” Mentioned some "bad apples". http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/08/us/politics/08palin.html "Palin Calls Criticism by McCain Aides 'Cruel and Mean-Spirited'"
2008-11-09 Nicholas Kristof's indirectly quotes Fox News, "Obama and the War on Brains"
2008-11-10 "Palin Defends Herself in Fox Interview", The Caucus Blog, New York Times
2008-11-12 "MSNBC retracts false Palin story; others duped" Associated Press, Fox and others reprint
2008-11-12 Maureen Dowd mentions Palin defending herself about remarks that did not confuse Africa as country or continent. "Boxers, Briefs, or Silks?"
2008-11-12 New York Times publishes article about hoax, "A Senior Fellow at the Institute of Nonexistence"
2008-11-15 "The Palin Effect: McCain camp should have given her a map", Letter to the Editor, Star Tribune, Bob Lundegaard
If you have the patience to read the comments to this letter, you'll find few that actually address what Lundegaard wrote. They almost all are off on their own agenda.
2008-11-05 Carl Cameron, Fox News, broadcast bit about Palin not knowing Africa is a continent. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWZHTJsR4Bc. No mention of source of information. Cameron does say, "McCain aides told me today" about Africa statement.
O'Reilly and Cameron
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1ktXKzT_gQ&NR=1 No mention of sources of information. Cameron does say that McCain staffers were met by Palin in a bathrobe.
2008-11-06 Palin-Africa Story Implodes Right Wing Media Cabal, Gawker, http://gawker.com/5077915/palin+africa-story-implodes-right-wing-media-cabal
2008-11-08 Fox News recap, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,449566,00.html, Newsweek, Cameron, and Hugh Miller "had it".
2008-11-08 Gail Collins writes that Carl Cameron of Fox News said Palin didn't know Africa was a continent. Collins includes that Palin says this is untrue. "A Political Manners Manual"
2008-11-08 Article on Palin reaction to criticism. “For the most part, absolutely, media persons, reporters, have been absolutely right on and there has been fairness and objectivity,” Mentioned some "bad apples". http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/08/us/politics/08palin.html "Palin Calls Criticism by McCain Aides 'Cruel and Mean-Spirited'"
2008-11-09 Nicholas Kristof's indirectly quotes Fox News, "Obama and the War on Brains"
2008-11-10 "Palin Defends Herself in Fox Interview", The Caucus Blog, New York Times
2008-11-12 "MSNBC retracts false Palin story; others duped" Associated Press, Fox and others reprint
2008-11-12 Maureen Dowd mentions Palin defending herself about remarks that did not confuse Africa as country or continent. "Boxers, Briefs, or Silks?"
2008-11-12 New York Times publishes article about hoax, "A Senior Fellow at the Institute of Nonexistence"
2008-11-15 "The Palin Effect: McCain camp should have given her a map", Letter to the Editor, Star Tribune, Bob Lundegaard
If you have the patience to read the comments to this letter, you'll find few that actually address what Lundegaard wrote. They almost all are off on their own agenda.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Millionaires' crocodile tears for the middle class
Obama, Biden, McCain, and Palin are trying to out-shout their opposition in how much they are working for the middle class. Give me a break, all four of them are millionaires.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
The fleeing elite
Republican partisans apparently have used the word "elite" to describe those who disagree with them too many times. Now the Republican-leaning elite are distancing themselves from the McCain-Palin candidacy:
David Brooks, Kathleen Parker, Charles Krauthammer, George Will, and now Christopher Buckley and Colin Powell. Now if some prominent politicians would do the same. Maybe we will get a strong, new moderate party.
David Brooks, Kathleen Parker, Charles Krauthammer, George Will, and now Christopher Buckley and Colin Powell. Now if some prominent politicians would do the same. Maybe we will get a strong, new moderate party.
Saturday, October 04, 2008
Unbalanced "balanced" reporting
We were only able to watch the Biden-Palin debate for about a half-hour. After about the third time that Gov. Palin refused to answer a question and went on to something else, we turned the TV off and went to do other things.
I was amazed later in the evening to find hardly any mention of this in online commentary. I was still amazed when the Duluth News Tribune gave both fairly good marks for their performance. It was only when I got to the very end of an article about UMD students watching the debate did I find this:
“She keeps changing the subject, cutting off the issue, like she’s trying to hide something or doesn’t have an answer,’’ [Josh] Clarke said. “She just shows a lack of experience, kind of naive.’’
- Duluth News Tribune, 2008-10-03
Fortunately, similar comments are appearing today. And surprise, more of it is coming from so-called conservative or centrist commentators. So-called liberals seem to be afraid of any criticism of Palin; that would make them part of the "biased media."
I'm sorry, but if most people understand there is a problem, and one candidate states there is no problem and another states we must address this problem with thoughtfulness; shouldn't we be more critical of the first?
I was amazed later in the evening to find hardly any mention of this in online commentary. I was still amazed when the Duluth News Tribune gave both fairly good marks for their performance. It was only when I got to the very end of an article about UMD students watching the debate did I find this:
“She keeps changing the subject, cutting off the issue, like she’s trying to hide something or doesn’t have an answer,’’ [Josh] Clarke said. “She just shows a lack of experience, kind of naive.’’
- Duluth News Tribune, 2008-10-03
Fortunately, similar comments are appearing today. And surprise, more of it is coming from so-called conservative or centrist commentators. So-called liberals seem to be afraid of any criticism of Palin; that would make them part of the "biased media."
I'm sorry, but if most people understand there is a problem, and one candidate states there is no problem and another states we must address this problem with thoughtfulness; shouldn't we be more critical of the first?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)