Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Alterman: Politicians should be congratulated for uncomfortable truths.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-09-06 11:35 PM
Original message
Alterman: Politicians should be congratulated for uncomfortable truths.
Alterman calls out Weisberg at Slate for his very nasty article on some Democrats, especially Dean. (BTW what has happened to Slate...it is not Democrat friendly.)

Glad to see him do this. It is deserved.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3449870 /

I keep reading this statement by Jake Weisberg in Slate where he is picking on Howard Dean and I cant believe it: His injudicious comment about the GOP being the party of white Christians was followed by his statement that "the idea that we're going to win this war is an idea that unfortunately is just plain wrong." Such gaffes lead to endless debate about how Howard Dean is screwing up, rather than about how Bush is screwing up.

How in the world is possible for Michael Kinsleys appointed successor to write the word gaffe in this context in the magazine Kinsley founded without pointing out Kinsleys most famous observation: that gaffe is what Washington calls a statement by a politician that happens to be true? Would Weisberg argue that White Christians do not dominate the Republican Party? Would he argue that we are winning the Iraq war, or are likely to in the foreseeable future?

Clearly both Dean statements constitute Kinsley gaffes in the respect that both are true. And its the job of intellectuals to congratulate politicians for speaking uncomfortable truths at least I thought it was. I know my memory is going, but I dont recall any cases in which when Kinsley wrote about such things, he was attacking the truth-tellers. But Weisberg seems to think Dean is deserving of contempt for exactly this reason. Am I missing something or is this as depressing as it looks?


Yep, Eric, it is a whole lot more depressing than that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC