In response to challenges to the legality and morality of the NSA’s surveillance program, President Obama said we should have a healthy debate about it (video HERE). This occasions George Neumayr at the American Spectator to make this comparison: He is open to a “healthy†debate about it. Holder and Obama are like drunk drivers … Continue reading The NSA knows about your analogy and slippery slope
There is much to distinguish Rush Limbaugh and George Will. But there is also much they have in common. They both explain Obama's electoral success by the completely non-racist suggestion that Obama, completely undeserving of the job, has profitted from affirmative action. What distinguishes Will from Limbaugh, however, is that Will is able to find an inappropriate … Continue reading Your analogy is bad and you should feel bad
Sunday, George Will issued a column on the public option. In this column, he argued that public option would drive the private insurance industry out of business. Among other things, he wrote: Assurances that the government plan would play by the rules that private insurers play by are implausible. Government is incapable of behaving like … Continue reading Barack Obama versus George Will
I was out of town for the weekend when Helene Cooper's abysmal analysis piece (On Obama's "straw men") appeared in the New York Times, so I'll pretty much just point everyone to discussions of it elsewhere. It seems to have been largely written by Fred Barnes, a conservative columnist who has long been griping about … Continue reading New York Times tries Critical Thinking 101 and then fails it
Today Michael Gerson writes of the "Decency of George W. Bush." The other day, in a similar vein, some jackass argued that George Bush's approval rating of the nation ought to be taken into account–the nation, the American people, have failed Bush. It wasn't Bush after all who lost an election in the popular vote … Continue reading They make dessert and call it peas
A few posts back (and for a couple of posts) I remarked on the tendency of "liberal" pundits to separate themselves from the "liberal" candidate by frequently criticizing him or her, usually for failing to look enough like the conservative candidate. Yesterday Ruth Marcus provided another excellent example of this–going after one of Obama's campaign … Continue reading Stand down
The other day we talked about the New York Times public editor's discussion of the factually challenged work of Edward Luttwak. Courtesy of Eric Alterman's column on Media Matters, we were alerted to the Chicago Tribune public editor's response to the Kathleen Parker column of a couple of weeks ago (which we discussed here). In … Continue reading Full blooded, check it and see
Lordy, what a presser yesterday! There was a lot for us to work on, but Trump gave an interesting answer to a challenge. First, the challenge. In the opening remarks and in the Q&A, Trump swung back to talking about the election. He said his 306 electoral votes to Clinton’s 232 was the largest win … Continue reading I just repeat things I read
From Eric Alterman at the Nation: A week before his 2009 inauguration, President-elect Barack Obama chose as his first high-profile social engagement a dinner party at George Will’s house, where he was joined by William Kristol, Charles Krauthammer and David Brooks. Obama no doubt intended to demonstrate his desire to reach across the ideological divide and … Continue reading Play their game
George Will, whose pseudo-logical musings at the Washington Post inspired our work here so many years ago, has moved from ABC to Fox News.  In keeping with the tone of his new employer, he waxes historical about the legality of Obamacare (via Talking Points Memo): In an interview with NPR’s “Morning Edition,” host Steve Inskeep asked Will about … Continue reading The Godwinator