- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Like the GOP, Howard Kurtz, who I usually enjoy reading, appears to believe that I am not smart enough to evaluate the VP candidate on my own---specifically, in the context of a televised debate. He wrote in his column yesterday:
Journalists score debates differently than ordinary people. They know when each candidate has ducked or fudged key nuances (is Palin really as moderate as Biden on gay rights?). But average voters wonder about things like why McCain never looked at Obama.
REALLY??? That statement assumes two things. First, it assumes that I do not possess in my brain any knowledge about the candidate from which to conclude (in real time) that a statement made by a candidate is dead wrong or is BS dressed up and presented as fact. Second, Kurtz's statement assumes that I am too stupid to know how to (or too stupid to recognize that I need to) research---e.g., search the internet---the accuracy of a claim made by a candidate in order to confirm or dispel any suspicion I have about a statement made by a candidate.
Bottom line, the arrogant superiority is not limited to the GOP, and it can be found in unexpected places, as I discovered yesterday. Moreover, the GOP and many in the media are woefully overconfident about their own intellectual superiority.
