- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Kurtz is a tool. No doubt. And lazy.
As a matter of strategy, then, attack him when the underlying issue is one that makes the other side look bad.
Otherwise, it looks to all the world like you are trying to shift the debate and defend the indefensible.
And, even while you are scoring points on Kurtz, you are allowing the other side to score points on you. The decision goes to them on the points. After all, the right is just as vocal as the left about media bias. Those complaints largely cancel each other out. All that is left, then, is the incident that sparked the debate. And it's a loser for us.
If Kurtz is anything, he'd dependable. He's an easy target. We'll get plenty of opportunities.
At the end of the day, Kurtz said the comments were vile and that you can't tar an entire ideology based on them. Even if he showed his bias by citing Malkin, it's hard to argue with the substance.
As I said, low-hanging fruit.
