Yesterday, I received some correspondence from a reader, and while I probably won't generally bother answering such things directly - preferring to let these posts speak for themselves - I haven't got anything I want to write about in particular today, and besides it might be useful to answer a question now so as to preempt the need to do more answering in the future.
So...this reader asks, "Do you think it's really good (journalistically speaking) to throw down an ad hominum [sic] such as 'that hypocrite Huckabee' without just a tiny bit of supporting evidence[?]"
Ah, where to begin? Well, first of all, I'm not a journalist in the typical sense. This is a blog, which means that I don't have to pretend, like MSM journalists do (because they are afraid of losing their precious "access"), to accept the phony pretexts of statements made by politicians and gov't officials. On the contrary, I can say what I damn well please without fear of any significant consequences because I am not obliged to be obsequious with the figures I write about. And so, somewhat absurdly, you will find far more truth in this blog - just as you will find more in comedy news shows like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report - than you will ever get from mainstream journalists.
Secondly, I actually do spend a decent amount of time researching the things I write about (and providing relevant links), and I don't feel like I should have to footnote or elaborate on everything little thing I say. If you feel like I've made an unsubstantiated claim, why not just substantiate it yourself? You've obviously got the Internet at your disposal, which means you have a hugely powerful tool for finding evidence yourself (assuming you can distinguish between facts and opinions, lies and truths, etc., etc.). Rest assured, anyways, that I have a good reasons for just about everything I say.
But, just to be extra helpful this one time...consider this clip from The Colbert Report (if the link doesn't work, search for "medium matters" on the Comedy Central video site). Obviously, no politician on either "side" should be obligated to defend or condemn the idiotic statements of private groups or individuals. But of course, huge numbers of Republicans, Huckabee included, blasted Democrats for not condemning Moveon.org's ill-considered ad but then cited free speech in defense of Limbaugh, just as lots of Democrats - also hypocrites - did the exact same thing, except with the nouns in a different order. So anyways, yeah, Huckabee is indeed a "Huck-ba-crite," just as Colbert was saying (though you're gonna have to be able to understand satire to not take him literally). Huckabee's typical-politician pandering to right-wing voters led him to make contradictory statements about situations that were essentially the same (except insofar as they were viewed by said right-wingers). Ergo, he is a hypocrite.
Which brings me to my final point. When are politicians not hypocrites? Name me one politician who isn't a two-faced opportunist, and I will happily dispel your delusion. Even when one comes along who somehow gets a reputation as a truth-teller, ala McCain with his "straight talk" in 2000, rest assured that it is only a matter of time before he shows his true (chameleon) colors, ala McCain kissing the thank-God-he's-dead Jerry Falwell's fat ass after having once called him and other evangelicals "agents of intolerance." In short, calling any politician a hypocrite is hardly something I should have to back up . On the contrary, you'd have far more cause to call for evidence if I had said "Huckabee isn't a hypocrite." I mean, c'mon, "politician" and "hypocrite" are practically synonyms, and anyone who has ever paid even a little attention to politics should know it.
But, if you genuinely need to have your eyes opened to the lies and chicanery of politicians, then just keep reading this blog. If you have the eyes to see, you will see...After all, that's kinda one of the main themes here...y'know, "bloated body politic" and all that? The deep-rooted ugliness and human folly of it all is pretty much right there in front of us on a daily basis. One simply has to choose between reality and fantasy. Granted, I know that for most people the latter is preferable - there is some comfort in it - but this blog is more about the former, and ultimately I do think that facing it will do us more good than denial.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
First I will identify myself as the one who asked the question about Huckabee. I have not had a chance yet to contact my friend, who works for the state of Arkansas to get the inside scoop on Huckabee but I will. In the meantime I just want to clear up some definitions to be sure we aren’t conflating error, change of mind or falling short of ones ideals with hypocrisy.
No doubt you know perfectly well that hypocrisy carries the idea of intent. One knowingly pretends to be something or believe something while actually being or believing something else. It’s not a misstep. It’s not a falling short—which we all do by the way. It’s a deliberate act.
I’ll grant that anyone in politics is always suspect. But I still be leave in innocent till proven guilty. Unfortunately I couldn’t wade through all the levels on your suggested Website—the Clolbert thing—although I tried for about five minutes. I like Colbert, but he’s not ever going to be my main source for anything anyway. So when I get the inside scoop, I’ll let you know. And believe me, my friend there is a truth teller. She had some really interesting personal experiences with a certain former governor of Arkansas who shall not be named here. I’ll just say that what I’ve heard from her about her personal experiences with this particular former governor makes the views of former President Ford on said individual come alive in living color.
But I digress. Since we all have fallen short at times in our lives let us leave a little room for redemption—even for the un-named governor. I try not to count things against people that are in their past if they seem to have changed. If, on the other hand, one can point to a current, continuing pattern of behavior that doesn’t square with their public positions, then you have a good case against them. I just happen to think that this presidential race could be pivotal for the country (actually I hope I’m wrong about that) so I think it’s more helpful to get the kind of facts out there such as those you put forth on Giuliani for example.
Meanwhile, I just want to be sure your not holding some past failing or change of mind or the like against Huckabee. I don’t be leave in the tooth fairy but I do still have hope that there is someone in the field that can be trusted to make good, sensible decisions. I know it’s a long shot but I’m not writing anybody off till I have good reason to do so.
Post a Comment