Let me suggest a different take on major media's role in Presidential politics. These people want to be relevant; they want to have an influence on who gets elected President. That's point one. Point two is that most of them are idiots and have no real grasp of substantive policy issues or how to report on the policy differences among candidates. Thus, they are left with People magazine stories about Edwards' haircuts, Thompson's wife, Bill and Hillary's sex life and Romney's dog. They aren't pro-Democratic and anti-Republican. Go back and look at the hit job that the NY Times and the Washington Post did on Al Gore in 1999 and 2000. It's that the non-substance, "we're so clever" story is all they know how to do.Comment Posted By Steven Donegal On 9.07.2007 @ 11:06
The problem for you, Rick, is that at this point you are one of the stabbers.Comment Posted By Steven Donegal On 28.06.2007 @ 17:51
I think he has the wrong Kennedy. The pessimism of the left grew far more out of the assassinations of MLK and RFK than JFK.Comment Posted By Steven Donegal On 19.06.2007 @ 15:08
What I found ironic in your linking to Riehl and Malkin is that they are right wing versions of Marcotte and generally not taken particularly seriously by anyone not of a right wing persuasion. I will admit, however, that Malkin's reading of Marcotte's posts was pretty funny.Comment Posted By Steven Donegal On 7.02.2007 @ 20:07
I am no fan of Amanda Marcotte, but you surely must have meant to set off irony meters everywhere but linking to Dan Riehl and Michelle Malkin for evidence that Amanda is not to be taken seriously.Comment Posted By Steven Donegal On 7.02.2007 @ 16:50
Your post seems to exemplify the problem everyone has with the situation in Iraq. You write a very long and well written post about Iraq and say:
"I think the first thing we have to do is pretty obvious; donâ€™t give up."
Unfortunately, your post does not contain a second thing or a third thing. It is fine to argue that some form of success in Iraq is essential for the US. It would be nice, however, to articulate a way to get there from here. This is all reminiscent of a Far Side cartoon:
Step 1. Invade Iraq
Step 2. then a miracle occurs
Step 3. Stable Iraqi democratic government
As the Far Side caption said, I think you need a little more explanation in Step 2.Comment Posted By Steven Donegal On 7.12.2006 @ 18:19
Small nit, but you quote Donald Gregg and identify him as "former Carter National Security Advisor." His bio is somewhat different.
Donald Gregg was a CIA official since 1951 and a liaison to President Carter's National Security Council and, National Security Advisor to Vice President George H.W. Bush and U.S. ambassador to South Korea from 1989 to 1993. He's now chairman of the board of the Korea SocietyComment Posted By Steven Donegal On 10.10.2006 @ 18:30
"We can laugh at them â€“ while shuddering with disgust at their hubris. In the end, they are harmless clowns whose act has a limited run. On January 20, 2009, they will be able to fold their tents and go back to their dull, dreary existence as ordinary citizens with fond memories of their time when they saw themselves as saviors of the Republic."
What a perfect description of the Bush Administration.Comment Posted By Steven Donegal On 4.10.2006 @ 14:12
If true, Clinton at least had opportunities to get Osama. Other than Tora Bora (miss), can the Bushies say the same thing?Comment Posted By Steven Donegal On 7.09.2006 @ 19:38
Kerry is and always has been a hack politician. It infuriates me that the Ds nominated him in '04. The guy is the quintessential back bencher. He would have been a terrible President. Unfortunately for the country, I think he might have been better than the current occupant of the White House. Can we please just get somebody that knows what the hell they're doing!Comment Posted By Steven Donegal On 15.06.2006 @ 10:18
Pages (2) :  2