Letters to the Editor
-
Kirchik Goes To The Library - Busted!
The New Republic
Angry White Man
by James Kirchick
The bigoted past of Ron Paul.
Post Date Tuesday, January 08, 2008
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca
Went to the two libraries where all those Survival Reports are.
That goose is cooked. He missed a couple that are on the way to Sara over at Orcinus but there is no question he wears a pointy white hooded sheet and hat behind closed doors.
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2008/01/ron-pauls-far-right-foundations.html
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=74978161-f730-43a2-91c3-de262573a129
-
Shall we redefine irony?
Shooter, of all people, notes that people are gullible and disinclined to think to hard about issues but rather respond to mindless slogans.
He is basically correct.
For anyone who doubts this is the case,we need only hold shooter himself up as a representative sample.
Credit where credit is due, he is basically correct. His problem is that he regards ignorance as a virtue so public apathy is seen as a feature, not a bug.
-
-- talesofunrest
"I think it is wildly optimistic for us to expect ‘the Public’ to make such a demand."
I do also and that's probably why I didn't suggest it.
Maybe that's why I suggested that if a network were to make such a change, it would draw viewers.
-
@Bystander
No one in their right mind likes violence.
I do think that one day mankind may progress to the point where we no longer need clumsy weapons like pistols and blasters and rail guns. We will be able to think real hard and make the bad man's head explode. But until that day comes, and since before the dawn of mankind when we were still monkeys, a certain amount of force has been required to keep the peace. It's just a fact of nature. Was there less violence and conflict in the acephalous proto-tribal societies of pre-history, before dominance hierarchies and civilization and recorded history? Maybe. Who can say? Dominance hierarchies preceded them in any case before we climbed down out of the trees. Maybe it's cyclical. As soon as peace breaks out I'll pop the cork on the champagne.
-
-- talesofunrest
I apologize.
Upon a re-reading of my previous post, I can certainly understand how you would believe that I suggested that the public be involved.
I agree that it would be wildly optimistic to hope for that. I believe it will take the actions of a network. Sort of a variation of the old saw...."build it and they will come."
-
-- factcheck1
"If Obama doesn't know what fiscal policy is, I doubt he is ready for the President's office. It is scary that all those college educated folks who support Obama don't seem to know what fiscal policy is either. Democracy doesn't work if we can't make informed choices about the candidate for whom we vote and why we are voting for them (based on issues and the candidate's answers to those issues)."
It's probable that Obama was sticking to his message by answering the question in terms which, while not describing fiscal policy, do describe what he is promising the voters he is targeting. His campaign is nothing if not disciplined.
Fault the questioner for not following up and demanding an answer to his question and not just merrily allowing a candidate to use him as a vessel with which to deliver his campaign message.
This is one of the things that is certainly missing in the coverage of politics. Reporters, true reporters, would follow up until they got either an answer to their question or were told no answer would be forthcoming....and they would report that fact also.
Reporters have gotten either lazy or too cozy with the subjects of their reports.
Probably both.
-
Media Narratives?
Glenn -
I appreciate your post, but I wonder isn't the navel gazing "Media Culpability" just another narrative structure we're all used to seeing?
I recall after Katrina and 9/11 a similar narrative "Oh, how could we have been so shallow all these years when there are all these important issues we should be covering?"
Anyway, not a particularly interesting observation, but still I wonder what the rest of your readers think?
-
Polling -- Josh Marshall
I've read a lot of reader emails tonight. And there's one line I've heard a fair amount of that I'd like to take some gentle exception to. A lot of people say that the pollsters and pundits have something to answer for or that they tried to put this away for Obama or close the book on Hillary. The character of reporting is another matter. But polls are usually right. Not always and not exactly. But by and large they have a very good record. It's silly to think that we -- whether 'we' is reporters or political junkies or ordinary voters -- are going to ignore the information that's right in front of us. And why should we?
It's true I guess that in an abstracted reality we could simply listen to the candidates, ignore all probabilistic data available, go to the polls with no idea of the result and learn the outcome the following morning. But that's not the world we live in nor do I think it's one I'd want to live in.--Josh Marshall
http://tinyurl.com/2rojfc
-
Jebbie
"build it and they will come."
A professor of economics wasn't altogether pleased when I offered that as the definition of Say's Law. ;-)
-
Paul Dirks
Tom Delay reiterated your point about shooter and mindless slogans the other day. He was on with Chris M. the night of the primaries and Chris asked him about differences between the moderates and hard-core evangelicals of the GOP.
Delay got a really "fart-smelling, disgusted, irate, contorted look" on his face (you could really see the veins pop out!) and explained the problem about moderates in the GOP as
"well, they just think too much".
It was hilarious-I never thought I see so much honesty out of Delay.
-
Jebbie
This is one of the things that is certainly missing in the coverage of politics. Reporters, true reporters, would follow up until they got either an answer to their question or were told no answer would be forthcoming....and they would report that fact also.
But that is bullying, as I have been informed here when I attempted to get my questions answered.
I realize that I'm not a reporter and that the posters here are not candidates, but it is impossible to have a debate based on facts and reason if those you are debating with refuse to answer your questions.
Any reporter who did as you suggest in your post would immediately be ostracized by both their fellow "reporters" and by the candidates and their campaigns in the current media climate.