Chi Trib columnist Eric Zorn on 12/23/04 took aim at Christians with their backs up about Christ being frozen out of Christmas, choosing a very fat target for his opening shot. This was "Jeff from Memphis," calling in to a talk show to complain that Christmas has been "taken over by the Kwanzaa group and some of these other radical groups." Zorn saw his opening and took it. "Ooo, 'the Kwanzaa group' is it now?" he wrote, and off he went:
"'The Christmas group' pulled the same sneaky trick in the 4th Century" by co-opting winter-solstice traditions for their own purposes, he wrote, unloading a point he seems to have been dying to make, gleaned from his research on sneaky groups over the centuries. Ooo, Kwanzaa group = 4th-century Christian church. Ooo and double-Ooo.
"Jesus is not 'the reason for the season,' as so many from 'the Christmas group' have smugly informed me in recent weeks," he wrote indignantly. It's "the return of the sun in this hemisphere," celebrated in other ways -- Zagmuk, Sacaea, Saturnalia, Kronos, Yule, by Mesopotamians, Babylonians and Persians, Romans, Greeks, and pre-Christian Germans respectively.
Well thank God, if I may use the expression, for someone finally giving it to smug Christians with their cruddy 2,000-year-old viewpoint.
He is quite irritated about hearing people say "Merry Christmas" aggressively, performing an "in-your-face sack dance . . . meant to underscore Christian dominance in American society." What the heck is a sack dance, for one thing? And what's this "dominance," which has him mad as hell and unwilling to take it any more?
He quotes a columnist about a "revolt" by Christians, and then scurries for the high ground of the detached who really has opponents' better interests at heart: "It's sad to see these angry people turning a glad tiding into a battle cry."
Glad tiding? Zorn is turning Christian? No. Dickensian maybe. He's a Bob Cratchit fan and loves that cheerful bearing up under hardship, the born-lame Tiny Tim on Bob's shoulder and all? He's for "seasonal jollity" and the "true spirit" of Christmas, urging Christians to observe it. The reason for it is something else.
Just why the heck is Tim cheerful, for instance? Good genes? That old winter solstice? Zagmuk, Sacaea, Saturnalia, Kronos, pre-Christian Yule? What the heck is the reason for the season, anyhow?
12/26/2004
12/21/2004
Funny, funny . . .
Funny 1: Chi Trib head, p-1, about heavy snow in Mich. City, IN: "Snow's White Dwarfs Town" Funny 2, in not same way: Obit writer says deceased "had a plethora of hobbies," intending to say nothing bad about the dead. But a plethora is too much,"an excessive amount," as in a plethora of complaints. One is reminded of the golden moment of moviemaking when El Guapo's lieutenant in "Three Amigos" laughed at the word and El Guapo asked him what it meant. to the lieutenant's chagrin.
12/20/2004
Chi Trib has p-1 story, "School district spending gap widest in years," meaning between highest- and lowest-spending districts, both of them with almost the same test scores! The same-scores news is in the 8th paragraph, where it is presented as raising "a more fundamental [than spending gap] and politically sensitive question: What does it cost to . . . educate a child?"
I'll say it raises that question. And others too, for readers who turn to the jump page, 16, where they may read that the lowest-spending district, in far South Suburban Frankfort, saves money by partnering with the park district for maintenance and program space and with the library, has higher than average class sizes and less experienced (and so less expensive) teachers, and puts more kids into a building, as 900 in one elementary school.
Good for Diane Rado and Darnell Little for bringing these things out. But that 8th-paragraph item, given good attention in several more paragraphs, actually should be the lead item: Money Doesn't Matter in Top and Bottom Spenders or something like it. That's man biting dog and thus news.
The current headline, on the other hand, as above, is (a) old stuff, even with the "widest in years" part, and (b) possibly phony.
The spending gap is not new, for one thing; so this head is as much propaganda as news.
The gap between top spender and least spending, $20G to not quite $5G, for another, ignores the substantial gap between top and #2 spender, $20G to $17.4G -- not mentioned in the story at all but shown in a jump-page table. So the top spender, a district near extra-expensive Lake Forest with only 130 kids, is an aberration and nothing to build a story on.
I'll say it raises that question. And others too, for readers who turn to the jump page, 16, where they may read that the lowest-spending district, in far South Suburban Frankfort, saves money by partnering with the park district for maintenance and program space and with the library, has higher than average class sizes and less experienced (and so less expensive) teachers, and puts more kids into a building, as 900 in one elementary school.
Good for Diane Rado and Darnell Little for bringing these things out. But that 8th-paragraph item, given good attention in several more paragraphs, actually should be the lead item: Money Doesn't Matter in Top and Bottom Spenders or something like it. That's man biting dog and thus news.
The current headline, on the other hand, as above, is (a) old stuff, even with the "widest in years" part, and (b) possibly phony.
The spending gap is not new, for one thing; so this head is as much propaganda as news.
The gap between top spender and least spending, $20G to not quite $5G, for another, ignores the substantial gap between top and #2 spender, $20G to $17.4G -- not mentioned in the story at all but shown in a jump-page table. So the top spender, a district near extra-expensive Lake Forest with only 130 kids, is an aberration and nothing to build a story on.
12/17/2004
Instapundit has item about alternative weekly in Nashville busted for taking prostitution ads, heads it "More crushing of dissent in John AshKKKroft's America," crossing out the last two words and subbing "Phil Bredeson's Tennessee," referring to the governor on whose watch this happened. He comments: Okay, Bredesen undoubtedly had nothing to do with this. But, then, John Ashcroft often got blamed for things he had nothing to do with, too. And how can anyone expect an alt-weekly to stay in business without sex ads? Is that a trenchant observation, or what?
12/11/2004
The sports page remains the truly entertaining part of a newspaper. Chi Trib columnist Mike Downey keeps up the tradition of Warren Brown, John Carmichael et al. He's not as dry as they, but this is in-face time for writers all over; so he does pretty well in the more or less detached manner that sits well with discriminating readers.
Today he has the first nay-saying I have seen about Magglio (Maggs) Ordonez, who just left the Sox in mid-level dudgeon with harsh remarks about management, mainly the GM. Downey lists various things to show Maggs's not being fair or even truthful, but one stands out: he made $14 mil last year.
That's been known, of course. But wouldn't it be good to state that early and often in any pro-sports employment story, as in "Magglio Ordinez ($14G/yr)" stated routinely, just as "R.-Ill" or "D.-Mo." is routinely stated for a member of Congress. We still love those guys and root for them and sympathize with them in their various troubles, but perspective is important too.
Elsewhere in Downey, and this is delicious, is his notation that in San Francisco, where hero Barry Bonds has recently claimed the lotion he used was not illegal, the Giants will continue to sell hot dogs without telling people they contain "potentially harmful carbohydrates." Yes! Not to mention calories.
D. also notes the Marquette students who want teams to be renamed Warriors, as in Ojibwa, etc., dropping the current, correct Golden Eagles name, which in Wisconsin, says D. is the only thing "not named for a Native American." This is not noteworthy, except that it leads a reader to recall that our so-called Native Americans (not native-born, like Downey, me, and many others) are actually our Oldest Immigrants, going back a very long time. They came from the northwest, I believe, paddling the Bering Straits, which couldn't have been an easy journey. But this is the sort of observation I do not expect to find in a newspaper, not even on the sports page.
Today he has the first nay-saying I have seen about Magglio (Maggs) Ordonez, who just left the Sox in mid-level dudgeon with harsh remarks about management, mainly the GM. Downey lists various things to show Maggs's not being fair or even truthful, but one stands out: he made $14 mil last year.
That's been known, of course. But wouldn't it be good to state that early and often in any pro-sports employment story, as in "Magglio Ordinez ($14G/yr)" stated routinely, just as "R.-Ill" or "D.-Mo." is routinely stated for a member of Congress. We still love those guys and root for them and sympathize with them in their various troubles, but perspective is important too.
Elsewhere in Downey, and this is delicious, is his notation that in San Francisco, where hero Barry Bonds has recently claimed the lotion he used was not illegal, the Giants will continue to sell hot dogs without telling people they contain "potentially harmful carbohydrates." Yes! Not to mention calories.
D. also notes the Marquette students who want teams to be renamed Warriors, as in Ojibwa, etc., dropping the current, correct Golden Eagles name, which in Wisconsin, says D. is the only thing "not named for a Native American." This is not noteworthy, except that it leads a reader to recall that our so-called Native Americans (not native-born, like Downey, me, and many others) are actually our Oldest Immigrants, going back a very long time. They came from the northwest, I believe, paddling the Bering Straits, which couldn't have been an easy journey. But this is the sort of observation I do not expect to find in a newspaper, not even on the sports page.
12/09/2004
From Peggy Noonan's Wall St. Jnl column today about Hillary C.:
She is inevitable as a candidate, but not as a president. There will be serious drawbacks and problems with her candidacy. When she speaks in a large hall she shouts and it is shrill; she sounds like some boomer wife from hell who's unpacking the grocery bags and telling you that you forgot not just the mayo but the mustard.
12/04/2004
Chi Trib page one has big feature w/pic about Hmongs in Twin Cities area – "We are Americans ourselves now. How can Americans hate us?" is quote from a "community leader" in St. Paul, over heartwarming four-column color shot of kindergarteners catching snow on their tongues. "The killing of six hunters stirs fears of a setback," apparently in Hmong-acceptance levels, reads the subhead
So six hunters were shot dead by a Hmong, and the talk is about people hating Hmongs. Where is story about why this guy went postal with a hunting rifle and whether other Hmongs are prepared to do the same?
This is journalistic do-goodism. Front-Pagers of yore were sneaky, unprincipled sensationalists – I know this because I saw Chicago the musical – but at least they defined news as man biting dog and not as an exercise in social work 101.
There was a news story, of course. It ran 11/23, with this at its tail end:
Vang had been arrested once before, on Christmas Eve 2001 in Minneapolis, after brandishing a gun and telling his wife he was going to kill her, said Ron Reier, a spokesman for the Minneapolis Police Department.
He was arrested on a felony complaint of domestic assault, Reier said. After being held for at least 36 hours in that incident, Reier said Vang was released after his wife declined to cooperate with authorities.
You wouldn’t know about that from this 12/4 page one feature.
So six hunters were shot dead by a Hmong, and the talk is about people hating Hmongs. Where is story about why this guy went postal with a hunting rifle and whether other Hmongs are prepared to do the same?
This is journalistic do-goodism. Front-Pagers of yore were sneaky, unprincipled sensationalists – I know this because I saw Chicago the musical – but at least they defined news as man biting dog and not as an exercise in social work 101.
There was a news story, of course. It ran 11/23, with this at its tail end:
Vang had been arrested once before, on Christmas Eve 2001 in Minneapolis, after brandishing a gun and telling his wife he was going to kill her, said Ron Reier, a spokesman for the Minneapolis Police Department.
He was arrested on a felony complaint of domestic assault, Reier said. After being held for at least 36 hours in that incident, Reier said Vang was released after his wife declined to cooperate with authorities.
You wouldn’t know about that from this 12/4 page one feature.
11/28/2004
RADIO DAY . . . Radio talker Bill Bennett on WIND competing with Don & Roma on WLS, both AM in Chicago, is like Shakespeare vs. Mickey Spillane. Bennett has a working philosophy of being guided by callers. Always reasonable, never cranky, smart guy, lots of experience. Caller the other day said he’d heard Katie Couric on the NBC Today show listening respectfully to NBA player Riotous (But Still Righteous) Ron Artest and the players rep. Artest waved his new CD for viewers, making a fifteen-minutes-of-fame sales opportunity of being suspended for fighting fans in the stands. The players’ rep, Billy Hunter, connected the players’ riot to the Iraq war, implying that we are desensitized to violence and that’s why Artest et al. fought fans. (I did not make that up.)
Matt Lauer on the same show, on the other hand, hit Artest hard with his record of suspensions for bad behavior, including smashing a TV camera. Artest responded that he had paid (been fined) $100G for that smashed camera and asked mockingly, "Where’s the camera at?" Laura Ingraham, whose show follows Bennett’s on WIND, made much of that. She’s funny and works off good insights, as how silly it is to blame the culture for one’s actions when conservative culture warriors have been mocked and scorned for decades for knocking the culture. She is a sort of Ringling Brothers to Bennett’s Shakespeare.
Meanwhile, if you want ongoing, daily critique of TV people like Couric (and often Lauer), you do not go to mainstream media (MSM) reps but to Media Research Center (MRC), whose web-based reporting is based entirely on this day this, that day that. Picky, picky, in view of one MSM media reporter in an email to me some months back. It's called inductive reasoning, I replied. MRC’s Brent Bozell et al. – another site is Accuracy in Media – nail the daily cases of left-wing bias. I would have thought a nod in that direction was in order by the MSM fellow, but he did not want to hear about it.
Jim Romenesko, of Poynter Institute, has quite thorough web-based coverage of (mostly left-oriented) media shop talk. It’s a good place to find MSM replies to bloggers and others, but it’s usually no place to find what MRC and Brent Bozell discover from their right-wing (majority-voter) perspective. Romenesko does a good job telling what LA Times and Wash Post writers say about bloggers, for instance.
One of the latter has a very long column billed as "Unconventional Wisdom," in which he delivers conventional wisdom about bloggers – "spectacular lack of judgment . . . abundant arrogance" – repeating the objection that they should never have run with those exit polls. This is an aside, however: the column is about exit polls, as for instance, that Republican voters are traditionally underrepresented in them, and networks’ unwillingness to ignore them this time, though cautioned to do so by a major exit pollster. The columnist is Wash Poster Richard Morin, q.v.
Matt Lauer on the same show, on the other hand, hit Artest hard with his record of suspensions for bad behavior, including smashing a TV camera. Artest responded that he had paid (been fined) $100G for that smashed camera and asked mockingly, "Where’s the camera at?" Laura Ingraham, whose show follows Bennett’s on WIND, made much of that. She’s funny and works off good insights, as how silly it is to blame the culture for one’s actions when conservative culture warriors have been mocked and scorned for decades for knocking the culture. She is a sort of Ringling Brothers to Bennett’s Shakespeare.
Meanwhile, if you want ongoing, daily critique of TV people like Couric (and often Lauer), you do not go to mainstream media (MSM) reps but to Media Research Center (MRC), whose web-based reporting is based entirely on this day this, that day that. Picky, picky, in view of one MSM media reporter in an email to me some months back. It's called inductive reasoning, I replied. MRC’s Brent Bozell et al. – another site is Accuracy in Media – nail the daily cases of left-wing bias. I would have thought a nod in that direction was in order by the MSM fellow, but he did not want to hear about it.
Jim Romenesko, of Poynter Institute, has quite thorough web-based coverage of (mostly left-oriented) media shop talk. It’s a good place to find MSM replies to bloggers and others, but it’s usually no place to find what MRC and Brent Bozell discover from their right-wing (majority-voter) perspective. Romenesko does a good job telling what LA Times and Wash Post writers say about bloggers, for instance.
One of the latter has a very long column billed as "Unconventional Wisdom," in which he delivers conventional wisdom about bloggers – "spectacular lack of judgment . . . abundant arrogance" – repeating the objection that they should never have run with those exit polls. This is an aside, however: the column is about exit polls, as for instance, that Republican voters are traditionally underrepresented in them, and networks’ unwillingness to ignore them this time, though cautioned to do so by a major exit pollster. The columnist is Wash Poster Richard Morin, q.v.
11/27/2004
Chicago, get ready for chaos, warns suburban moneybags fellows with whom Sun-Times Saturday columnist Tom Roeser had lunch with. Daley II riding for a fall with multiple scandals, signs of mismanagement. Two congressmen in the wings, neither of them a Harold Washington. Daily crisis press conferences a-coming, Louis XVI revisited.
11/22/2004
FOUND IN FALLUJAH . . . Run quick, Chicagoans, and get yr Trib with its p-1 James Janega latest from Fallujah, where Marines found torture chambers and terrorist banners and more.
(It’s P-1 in hard copy, with jump to last pg of first section, story of the day, paired with Liz Sly’s out of Baghdad, an overview about coming elections, but it’s hard to find on the Trib’s web site, whose p-1 has the black-victim picture Trib editors love to run, going with YESTERDAY’S p-1 hard cover story with frightening, not to say scare, headline, "Poor live housing nightmare while investors reap benefits." Wait, Chi Trib site caught up to its hard copy sometime after 6:30, when it still had yesterday’s stories. Something wrong here: is this a Toonerville Trolley of a news operation, or isn’t it?)
Janega’s "Blood, knives, cage hint at atrocities: Tip leads U.S. to alleged al-Zarqawi house of torture" – a much more matter-of-fact announcement than yesterday’s – is his usual telling what he sees and hears. It closes with what’s written on the wall of a "dungeon-like room, pitch-black" except for Marines’ flashlights next to "a bloody fingerprint" – in English and Arabic the cryptic words:
"Put . . . "
"Kept . . . "
"Plan . . . "
" . . . to pass on"
– all in English and Arabic – and beside them one more word, "written only in giant Arabic loops:
"’Hope.’"
Janega also tells of:
* "a steel bar bolted into the bathroom wall," from which "a chain dangled,"
* "a cage tucked into a corner, cobbled together from rusted bits of wire, chicken coops, broken crates and twist ties . . . tall enough for a person to stand in,"
* "a disassembled hand grenade, rubber gloves and numerous bottles of chemicals," including potassium cyanide identified by a translator, who "at that point Sunday afternoon . . . was the only one who could talk."
(It’s P-1 in hard copy, with jump to last pg of first section, story of the day, paired with Liz Sly’s out of Baghdad, an overview about coming elections, but it’s hard to find on the Trib’s web site, whose p-1 has the black-victim picture Trib editors love to run, going with YESTERDAY’S p-1 hard cover story with frightening, not to say scare, headline, "Poor live housing nightmare while investors reap benefits." Wait, Chi Trib site caught up to its hard copy sometime after 6:30, when it still had yesterday’s stories. Something wrong here: is this a Toonerville Trolley of a news operation, or isn’t it?)
Janega’s "Blood, knives, cage hint at atrocities: Tip leads U.S. to alleged al-Zarqawi house of torture" – a much more matter-of-fact announcement than yesterday’s – is his usual telling what he sees and hears. It closes with what’s written on the wall of a "dungeon-like room, pitch-black" except for Marines’ flashlights next to "a bloody fingerprint" – in English and Arabic the cryptic words:
"Put . . . "
"Kept . . . "
"Plan . . . "
" . . . to pass on"
– all in English and Arabic – and beside them one more word, "written only in giant Arabic loops:
"’Hope.’"
Janega also tells of:
* "a steel bar bolted into the bathroom wall," from which "a chain dangled,"
* "a cage tucked into a corner, cobbled together from rusted bits of wire, chicken coops, broken crates and twist ties . . . tall enough for a person to stand in,"
* "a disassembled hand grenade, rubber gloves and numerous bottles of chemicals," including potassium cyanide identified by a translator, who "at that point Sunday afternoon . . . was the only one who could talk."
11/18/2004
PROBLEMS, PROBLEMS: “Most agree on this: The United States has an image problem,” says Sun-Times’s Lynn Sweet in today’s column over-ambitiously entitled, “What in the world awaits Condi?” as in Condoleezza Rice, our new sec. of state. Muslims and Canadians do not approve of our war in Iraq, for instance. Golly.
The goal is "to advance U.S. interests and security and to provide the moral basis for U.S. leadership in the world” by “public” diplomacy, says Sweet. An undersecretary’s position, currently empty, would normally handle this.
“There is a sense of urgency,” she says, felt by whom she does not say. She discusses this “public” diplomacy in spin-control terms: counter the lie right away, nip lies in buds.
But then she notes that the “regarded” Colin Powell, apparently meaning well-regarded, did not travel enough and so neglected “personal” diplomacy, staying home to protect his Rumsfeld-threatened turf. But Rice’s turf is not threatened. So:
“Rice should start traveling.
“A lot.”
(Paragraph structure in original.)
The unfilled-undersecretary-post problem is left behind.
Definitely.
Then (no transition) we are told about Congr. Henry Hyde, who “wrote . . . public diplomacy-related provisions in” (into?) a bill intended to reform our intelligence operation.
What's more, we have not enough translators. This problem is “massive,” in case you thought the lack of both public and private diplomacy was big.
Wait. “Back on [to?] public diplomacy.” Period.
(Sweet’s mother was scared by a telegraph operator, as boys in the 40s gibed about an untoward penchant: the penchant-holder’s mother had a nasty fright during pregnancy, leaving the holder with said penchant. If a kid repeated himself, his mother had been scared by a broken phonograph needle. Not brilliant but serviceable on the playground.)
Then Sweet speaks of a “Broadcasting Board of Governors” and its “startups” since Sept. 11, 2001.
“But public diplomacy is more than just good PR,” she writes, meaning radio programs – the “startups” just mentioned. Then she names more things to do, including “grants to developing nations to develop its [their?] own free press, putting content on the Internet and increasing money into [italics added] Arabic and Chinese language training. It's the whole message.”
I’ll say. But excuse me. I have to go increase some money into the parking meter. They are nasty about that stuff in Oak Park, demonstrating no diplomacy whatever.
The goal is "to advance U.S. interests and security and to provide the moral basis for U.S. leadership in the world” by “public” diplomacy, says Sweet. An undersecretary’s position, currently empty, would normally handle this.
“There is a sense of urgency,” she says, felt by whom she does not say. She discusses this “public” diplomacy in spin-control terms: counter the lie right away, nip lies in buds.
But then she notes that the “regarded” Colin Powell, apparently meaning well-regarded, did not travel enough and so neglected “personal” diplomacy, staying home to protect his Rumsfeld-threatened turf. But Rice’s turf is not threatened. So:
“Rice should start traveling.
“A lot.”
(Paragraph structure in original.)
The unfilled-undersecretary-post problem is left behind.
Definitely.
Then (no transition) we are told about Congr. Henry Hyde, who “wrote . . . public diplomacy-related provisions in” (into?) a bill intended to reform our intelligence operation.
What's more, we have not enough translators. This problem is “massive,” in case you thought the lack of both public and private diplomacy was big.
Wait. “Back on [to?] public diplomacy.” Period.
(Sweet’s mother was scared by a telegraph operator, as boys in the 40s gibed about an untoward penchant: the penchant-holder’s mother had a nasty fright during pregnancy, leaving the holder with said penchant. If a kid repeated himself, his mother had been scared by a broken phonograph needle. Not brilliant but serviceable on the playground.)
Then Sweet speaks of a “Broadcasting Board of Governors” and its “startups” since Sept. 11, 2001.
“But public diplomacy is more than just good PR,” she writes, meaning radio programs – the “startups” just mentioned. Then she names more things to do, including “grants to developing nations to develop its [their?] own free press, putting content on the Internet and increasing money into [italics added] Arabic and Chinese language training. It's the whole message.”
I’ll say. But excuse me. I have to go increase some money into the parking meter. They are nasty about that stuff in Oak Park, demonstrating no diplomacy whatever.
11/16/2004
Can't imagine who's doing a better job in Fallujah than Chi Trib's James Janega, here with another day in the city that became a battlefield. He eyeballed the aftermath in houses, spotting family pictures and sandbags (used by insurgents), dusty Koran and English-speaking textbook, prayer rug and teacups, a can of men's black hair color with "Happy Days Again" written on it in English.
In one such house, he writes, an insurgent waited in the dark and when a five-man U.S. squad opened the door, rolled a grenade toward them that killed one and wounded four. Claim cards are left in each house so that the owners can eventually be compensated by us.
In one such house, he writes, an insurgent waited in the dark and when a five-man U.S. squad opened the door, rolled a grenade toward them that killed one and wounded four. Claim cards are left in each house so that the owners can eventually be compensated by us.
11/15/2004
EMBEDDED . . . Chi Trib's James Janega showed up for work again in Fallujah, hanging out with GIs including Sgt. Marc Veen, 24, of Chicago, watching him at his rooftop post plugging an enemy sniper. "He would have gotten one of my buddies," Veen told him.
He was with them as they rested or slept. One marked a grenade he meant to launch later. "This is 4 my buddy," he inscribed. His buddy had been killed the previous day. "It hurts," said the sergeant, from Norristown, Pa., who'd been at it for three days. "I can't really think about it because I have to look out for my guys."
"Grief he pushed off," wrote Janega. "Rage he kept."
The dead buddy's wife (now widow) "lives across the street from my wife," the Pa. sergeant said softly. "I'm all about fighting."
Later the chaplain, preaching in a ruined kitchen, quoted St. Paul: "I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me." He spoke "with his right hand raised and eyes clenched shut, ignoring muffled blasts from the street."
"We pray to the heavenly father for our wives, our children, our parents. . . " he said. "Give us victory, victory, victory."
=======
A few weeks ago, in Chicago, Janega was reporting on what Judge Anne Burke told Loyola U. audiences about clergy abuse and bishops. I noticed a change in the electronic version, with the notation that a mistake had been corrected and thought, that's 21st-century journalism: mistakes can be corrected.
I emailed Janega to that effect, and he got back, full of apology for making the mistake in the first place. He surprised me with that. Reporters err; it was correcting the error that had struck me. The guy is conscientious, as is clear from this battlefield reportage.
He was with them as they rested or slept. One marked a grenade he meant to launch later. "This is 4 my buddy," he inscribed. His buddy had been killed the previous day. "It hurts," said the sergeant, from Norristown, Pa., who'd been at it for three days. "I can't really think about it because I have to look out for my guys."
"Grief he pushed off," wrote Janega. "Rage he kept."
The dead buddy's wife (now widow) "lives across the street from my wife," the Pa. sergeant said softly. "I'm all about fighting."
Later the chaplain, preaching in a ruined kitchen, quoted St. Paul: "I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me." He spoke "with his right hand raised and eyes clenched shut, ignoring muffled blasts from the street."
"We pray to the heavenly father for our wives, our children, our parents. . . " he said. "Give us victory, victory, victory."
=======
A few weeks ago, in Chicago, Janega was reporting on what Judge Anne Burke told Loyola U. audiences about clergy abuse and bishops. I noticed a change in the electronic version, with the notation that a mistake had been corrected and thought, that's 21st-century journalism: mistakes can be corrected.
I emailed Janega to that effect, and he got back, full of apology for making the mistake in the first place. He surprised me with that. Reporters err; it was correcting the error that had struck me. The guy is conscientious, as is clear from this battlefield reportage.
11/14/2004
Chi Trib's James Janega rode a tank to work. If Sun-Times man Tom Fitzpatrick got a Pulitzer for on-spot reporting for his deadline piece on Weatherman rioting in Chicago in the 70s, what about the guy who tells us what the tank gunner says -- "Wow. We're the only ones left here" -- when word comes of enemy success up ahead in the mean streats of Fallujah?
11/13/2004
Copy editing Chi Trib (somebody has to do it):
Consider this of 11/12/04, "Experts see states as force in fighting global warming," in which Stevenson Swanson and his editors can’t decide if he’s talking about warming or states or Bush, who won’t sign the Kyoto treaty.
NEW YORK -- [Delete: With the re-election of President Bush, state governments and big business will likely be the biggest forces pushing policies and developing innovative technologies aimed at reducing U.S. emissions of the gases scientists say are causing global warming.]
[Delete: That forecast by leaders in the environmental and business communities is based on the Bush administration's opposition to the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement that seeks to cut the amount of so-called greenhouse gases that enter the atmosphere, where they trap heat.]
The nation’s environmental and business leadership is unanimous in its opinion that what Bush won’t do about global warming, someone else will have to do, namely the states and big business. [If not unanimous, then what? Don’t just say leaders. How many, please, if that’s not too much to ask.]
The Kyoto treaty, which Bush rejected, requires industrialized countries to cut their emissions of carbon dioxide and other climate-changing substances on average by 5.2 percent below their 1990 levels.
[Delete: When the president] Bush [we know he’s the president] rejected the treaty in 2001 [Delete: he said the agreement was], calling it fatally flawed because it excluded developing nations [Delete: such as], including China and India. Forcing U.S. businesses to reduce their emissions while letting companies in those countries off the hook would drive up the cost of American products and cost jobs, Bush said.
[Delete: An August report by an administration official indicated that the buildup of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere was the most likely explanation for global warming, a shift from the administration's previous position of emphasizing the scientific uncertainties of climate change.]
In support of Bush, the administration emphasized the scientific uncertainties of climate change but in August reported [Delete: report by an administration official indicated] that global warming [Delete: the buildup of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere was] is the most likely explanation [Delete: for,] thus producing significant doublespeak. [just kidding about the doublespeak reference, which is what Swanson means or what he says means if he doesn’t know it but may constitute editorializing]
But Bush still believes that rejecting [Delete: the] Kyoto [Delete: accord] was [Delete: the] right [Delete: move], Environmental Protection Agency Administrator [top dog? source of just mentioned August report, unaccountably unsourced by Swanson?] Mike Leavitt [yes, top dog: I looked him up; he’s Michael O. Leavitt, former governor of Utah, though apparently just good old Mike to Swanson] told [Delete: The] Associated Press since the election. [Delete: in a postelection interview with]
In any case [got to have transition here, can’t just string things together, even if the items are pearls], the administration favors voluntary over mandatory measures [Delete: programs] to reduce the emissions from automobiles, power plants and factories that Kyoto supporters blame for warming. Moreover, the administration has [Delete:] also allocated several billion dollars to support [Delete: the] development of new technologies such as hydrogen cells that [Delete: would] power cars without producing carbon dioxide. But such technologies are thought to be many years away from widespread use.
. . . etc. etc., all to make Swanson’s meaning clear, so as to keep readers’ attention.
=================================
More more more, from (now) several blocks away, in the Apparel Center . . . Sun-Times religion writer Cathleen Falsani, who often takes a celebrity approach to her beat – her Hugh Hefner interview comes to mind. – had an 11/12/04 interview with a considerably more attractive subject, a woman who saved Jews from Nazis in the 40s. She opened with fairly feckless questioning: "What is morality? Who is moral? And whose morals are we talking about anyway" but then declined to enter this "Great Moral Debate of ‘04," writing, "I will demure."
No. She will be demure about it – reserved, modest, shy? Hardly. No "be" is missing, but an "e" has sneaked in to do damage to her message. She will "demur" – show reluctance. And even then she’s doing more than show reluctance; she is declining or even refusing.
How does one know this? One looks it up in the Compact OED, here and here. The origin "perhaps" of each is the Old French "demourer" – ‘remain, stay’, influenced by ‘mur’ – ‘grave.’ The noun "grave," so that one is quiet as ...? Or the adjective, so that one is very ("tres") serious. I do not know. I am a copy editor, not a lexicologist.
Consider this of 11/12/04, "Experts see states as force in fighting global warming," in which Stevenson Swanson and his editors can’t decide if he’s talking about warming or states or Bush, who won’t sign the Kyoto treaty.
NEW YORK -- [Delete: With the re-election of President Bush, state governments and big business will likely be the biggest forces pushing policies and developing innovative technologies aimed at reducing U.S. emissions of the gases scientists say are causing global warming.]
[Delete: That forecast by leaders in the environmental and business communities is based on the Bush administration's opposition to the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement that seeks to cut the amount of so-called greenhouse gases that enter the atmosphere, where they trap heat.]
The nation’s environmental and business leadership is unanimous in its opinion that what Bush won’t do about global warming, someone else will have to do, namely the states and big business. [If not unanimous, then what? Don’t just say leaders. How many, please, if that’s not too much to ask.]
The Kyoto treaty, which Bush rejected, requires industrialized countries to cut their emissions of carbon dioxide and other climate-changing substances on average by 5.2 percent below their 1990 levels.
[Delete: When the president] Bush [we know he’s the president] rejected the treaty in 2001 [Delete: he said the agreement was], calling it fatally flawed because it excluded developing nations [Delete: such as], including China and India. Forcing U.S. businesses to reduce their emissions while letting companies in those countries off the hook would drive up the cost of American products and cost jobs, Bush said.
[Delete: An August report by an administration official indicated that the buildup of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere was the most likely explanation for global warming, a shift from the administration's previous position of emphasizing the scientific uncertainties of climate change.]
In support of Bush, the administration emphasized the scientific uncertainties of climate change but in August reported [Delete: report by an administration official indicated] that global warming [Delete: the buildup of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere was] is the most likely explanation [Delete: for,] thus producing significant doublespeak. [just kidding about the doublespeak reference, which is what Swanson means or what he says means if he doesn’t know it but may constitute editorializing]
But Bush still believes that rejecting [Delete: the] Kyoto [Delete: accord] was [Delete: the] right [Delete: move], Environmental Protection Agency Administrator [top dog? source of just mentioned August report, unaccountably unsourced by Swanson?] Mike Leavitt [yes, top dog: I looked him up; he’s Michael O. Leavitt, former governor of Utah, though apparently just good old Mike to Swanson] told [Delete: The] Associated Press since the election. [Delete: in a postelection interview with]
In any case [got to have transition here, can’t just string things together, even if the items are pearls], the administration favors voluntary over mandatory measures [Delete: programs] to reduce the emissions from automobiles, power plants and factories that Kyoto supporters blame for warming. Moreover, the administration has [Delete:] also allocated several billion dollars to support [Delete: the] development of new technologies such as hydrogen cells that [Delete: would] power cars without producing carbon dioxide. But such technologies are thought to be many years away from widespread use.
. . . etc. etc., all to make Swanson’s meaning clear, so as to keep readers’ attention.
=================================
More more more, from (now) several blocks away, in the Apparel Center . . . Sun-Times religion writer Cathleen Falsani, who often takes a celebrity approach to her beat – her Hugh Hefner interview comes to mind. – had an 11/12/04 interview with a considerably more attractive subject, a woman who saved Jews from Nazis in the 40s. She opened with fairly feckless questioning: "What is morality? Who is moral? And whose morals are we talking about anyway" but then declined to enter this "Great Moral Debate of ‘04," writing, "I will demure."
No. She will be demure about it – reserved, modest, shy? Hardly. No "be" is missing, but an "e" has sneaked in to do damage to her message. She will "demur" – show reluctance. And even then she’s doing more than show reluctance; she is declining or even refusing.
How does one know this? One looks it up in the Compact OED, here and here. The origin "perhaps" of each is the Old French "demourer" – ‘remain, stay’, influenced by ‘mur’ – ‘grave.’ The noun "grave," so that one is quiet as ...? Or the adjective, so that one is very ("tres") serious. I do not know. I am a copy editor, not a lexicologist.
11/12/2004
Check out David Sullum's today in which he contemns (subjects to withering contempt) tax-funded stadiums. Yes, many the taxpayer, even those rooting in person for the home team, will say yea to that, what with Reinsdorf and friends getting hundreds of million from Mother Illinois for that new thing at 35th & Shields.
But would it not be better if the goateed, bespectacled, earnest-looking (and well-informed) Sullum, a doughty libertarian, had NOT opened with the damning admission that he has gone just once in his life to a major league game and found it boring? Is there no libertarian editor who could have told him, I know what you mean, but you have friends out there for whom this admission constitutes a self-damning admission of unreliability?
Jacob, don't do it, they would have said. Skip the confession about almost never going to a ball game and being bored when you do. It's not worth it.
That said, Jacob makes hash of the publicly funded stadium, with special attention today to the imminent rise of the baseball Senators. Its 41,000 seats will cost a half billion-plus in public money raised by a new tax on business, that source of all wealth whom we love to hate. Not to worry, says DC Mayor Anthony Williams, 364 new jobs averaging $260,000 will supply the deficit. (But how many of those jobs are popcorn vendors, how many pouty superstars?)
Furthermore, cruddy Anacostia, where the stadium would be built, will rise with the new Senators, or Nationals or whatever. Yes, with baseball-season in-stadium eateries, etc. Stadiums are a bonanza for parking lot owners and people with big back yards they can pave over or rooftops from which paid spectators can watch the game if the team owners have not blocked their view with various devices. And bars to which game-maddened fans can repair afterwards, yes. This is neighborhood revitalization?
80 economists don't think so, Sullum tells us. Nothing notable will come of a new stadium, they told the mayor, who almost certainly pitched their letter forthwith into the nearest spittoon. Spending just moves around, they said, citing "a vast body of economic research." And it normally takes a very strong man to withstand that kind of pressure. In fact, 37 cities were hurt by presence of pro teams 1969-96, according to a Cato Institute paper that had something to say about "significant negative impact on the level of real per capita income." That sort of talk may go with spectacles and goatees and people who don't go to games, but should we ignore it?
Meanwhile, in DC Sullum wonders what other effects there will be, thanks to the expected tax on large businesses (whose owners are outnumbered at the pools by owners of small businesses and owners of no businesses) and its expected lowering of wages and raising of prices.
But would it not be better if the goateed, bespectacled, earnest-looking (and well-informed) Sullum, a doughty libertarian, had NOT opened with the damning admission that he has gone just once in his life to a major league game and found it boring? Is there no libertarian editor who could have told him, I know what you mean, but you have friends out there for whom this admission constitutes a self-damning admission of unreliability?
Jacob, don't do it, they would have said. Skip the confession about almost never going to a ball game and being bored when you do. It's not worth it.
That said, Jacob makes hash of the publicly funded stadium, with special attention today to the imminent rise of the baseball Senators. Its 41,000 seats will cost a half billion-plus in public money raised by a new tax on business, that source of all wealth whom we love to hate. Not to worry, says DC Mayor Anthony Williams, 364 new jobs averaging $260,000 will supply the deficit. (But how many of those jobs are popcorn vendors, how many pouty superstars?)
Furthermore, cruddy Anacostia, where the stadium would be built, will rise with the new Senators, or Nationals or whatever. Yes, with baseball-season in-stadium eateries, etc. Stadiums are a bonanza for parking lot owners and people with big back yards they can pave over or rooftops from which paid spectators can watch the game if the team owners have not blocked their view with various devices. And bars to which game-maddened fans can repair afterwards, yes. This is neighborhood revitalization?
80 economists don't think so, Sullum tells us. Nothing notable will come of a new stadium, they told the mayor, who almost certainly pitched their letter forthwith into the nearest spittoon. Spending just moves around, they said, citing "a vast body of economic research." And it normally takes a very strong man to withstand that kind of pressure. In fact, 37 cities were hurt by presence of pro teams 1969-96, according to a Cato Institute paper that had something to say about "significant negative impact on the level of real per capita income." That sort of talk may go with spectacles and goatees and people who don't go to games, but should we ignore it?
Meanwhile, in DC Sullum wonders what other effects there will be, thanks to the expected tax on large businesses (whose owners are outnumbered at the pools by owners of small businesses and owners of no businesses) and its expected lowering of wages and raising of prices.
11/10/2004
WLS's Don & Roma raised, dodged issue about 100 lb. female cop overpowered and disarmed by 230 lb. carjacker whom she had pursued into a vacant lot. Made whole issue the dumb one about who�s right, mother who says he�s a good boy or cops who tell bad things he did. Callers immediately raised the other issue, whether this cop was the man for the job. These (male) callers, some of them apparently cops themselves, raised the not-ready issue gingerly and secondarily at first. But it soon became top item, with Don saying several times he didn�t want to talk about it.
Eventually a man called saying he�s a veteran of eight (not nine or seven) bar fights, saying a good small woman or man can get the better of a much bigger guy with the right punch administered quickly. And Roma chimed in to say there are 65 male cops who would also have been disarmed by this big guy. So Chicago�s hot conservative couple dodged the obvious.
What were they thinking when they brought it up in the first place? Tiny female cop easily bested by big offender, and nothing is to be said about lack of physical parity? Callers are put off, Don not wanting to go there, Roma getting defensive? What�s up in Don & Roma Land, newly repopulated by them after long contract-fight hiatus? They sell well and are worth a lot, but was what they say on air part of the dispute? How big a part?
(Yes, these are not newspaper performers, but radio talkers are people too.)
Eventually a man called saying he�s a veteran of eight (not nine or seven) bar fights, saying a good small woman or man can get the better of a much bigger guy with the right punch administered quickly. And Roma chimed in to say there are 65 male cops who would also have been disarmed by this big guy. So Chicago�s hot conservative couple dodged the obvious.
What were they thinking when they brought it up in the first place? Tiny female cop easily bested by big offender, and nothing is to be said about lack of physical parity? Callers are put off, Don not wanting to go there, Roma getting defensive? What�s up in Don & Roma Land, newly repopulated by them after long contract-fight hiatus? They sell well and are worth a lot, but was what they say on air part of the dispute? How big a part?
(Yes, these are not newspaper performers, but radio talkers are people too.)
11/09/2004
Notice, please, this in today's Chi Trib, by deputy edit page editor John McCormick, once of Newsweek, about "the press" missing a story because of its insularity. He shows (diplomatically) how Chi Trib ran stories that did not miss the story, in this case how the nation was veering towards "exercised values" vote orientation, while articulating nicely the beef vs. mainstream media -- MSM in blogger parlance. Yes, Virginia, Chi Trib is quoting National Review Online, and Newt Gingrich too.
10/25/2004
WISE GUY . . . In a Sunday 8/22/04 Chi Trib column, markets writer Bill Barnhart reflects conventional wisdom among newsies in a series of subordinated phrases that demonstrate disaffiliation from Bush:
"Bush must overcome his mess in Iraq." His was an "ill-fated adventure into military conquest." He counts on "terrorism hysteria . . . as a political strategy." The nation is "already made skeptical by the 9/11 Commission report." The U.S. is in "low esteem" with "other nations."
Bush has "economic ideologues in his administration." There have been "record deficits under Bush.” A source says the war is "not going well" and "favors Kerry," even if he's "not in the lead now" because of it.
None of this was argued, just taken for granted.
FOLLOWING ONE’S LEAD . . . 8/20/04, Chi Trib finally reported on Swift Boat Vets v. Kerry – when Kerry brought it up. Was not news fit to print before that. Too yucky. Or a vampire requiring stake in heart, as Trib reporter Frank James told E&P. Was result of "too many" news sources out there, said Trib managing editor James O'Shea. Oh the trouble CT has seen, forced by raggedy-ass competition to cover this quite unseemly story about the candidate's tangled web.
Hey, did NYT cover it? No. So what's the problem?
A LEAGUE OF HIS OWN . . . And wasn't it grand the way Chi Trib's Eric Zorn referred hard-copy readers of his conventional stuff to his really interesting web-site stuff the other day, featuring reader reaction to something or other? Z. has dropped one of his columns to have more time for his web site, whose readership he compared (modestly) to hard-copy Chi Trib circulation but not to Instapundit or other performers in the blogosphere, in whose league he does not play. Not to mention Drudge Report, whose circulation exceeds Chi Trib's. Nonetheless, Z. should continue trying his hand at blogging. He's prolific. We have to give him that.
One of his problems, however, is he's heavy-handed. Tin ear and all that, a sort of Al Gore-like bombs-away delivering of facts on top of facts. Has no sense of merely suggesting, in part because he's still caught in the hard-copy mode of either plodding recitation or zany fun and games and in part perhaps because of his being a campus brat, which is not to say word one about his parents as persons but to point out the peculiar wordiness and head-tripping into which campus people fall more than your average person. Talking heads come to mind, but more a matter of mind going lickety split and leaving communication behind. Do I make myself clear?
Contrast Z., for instance, with the aforementioned ABC News’s The Note, in which Mark Halperin et al. pull lots of stuff together daily, summarizing and shorthanding pungently and wittily. There's a knack to that. It beats James Taranto's Best of the Web, I think, which also gets a bit complicated at times, even while performing indispensably.
ERNIE PYLE? . . . World War II battle reports in Chi Trib and other papers routinely led with numbers dead and wounded, driving home the losses incurred, the better to discourage the home front, as our world was called. Not quite. Instead, the news was about victories or setbacks, with emphasis on the first. But battle reports from Iraq and Afghanistan are mostly about casualties. Why?
FDR DONE IN . . . Point made by MSM (Main Stream Media) reporter in an email to Instapundit about Iraq coverage published 10/21:
It's frankly impossible to imagine what might have happened to FDR's presidency if WWII was covered the way the various news media do the job right now. Someone in the blogosphere recently pointed out that 750 American troops died in a training accident during preparations for D-Day. Can you imagine that? Today such an occurrence would have an almost apocalyptic impact in this country, if you consider the way it would be conveyed to the public through television.
HIGH-PRICED . . . The hit man was offered $20G and a city job, says Sun-Times head 10-14-04. The man wanted more than money, he wanted his license to steal.
WE CARE, WE CARE . . . 10/17/04 Sunday Chi Trib featured big in-your-face p-1 color pic of black victim (what else is new?) with story attacking reliability of finger-printing and other forensics measures. Trib Mag cover story same day was on gung-ho pacifist – ahem, peace activist – by the infamous Don Terry, whose story praising former terrorist and current advocate of terrorism William Ayers ran in the Mag on the Sunday after 9/11, requiring a trademark run-of-paper apology by Trib apologist-in-chief (who whines a lot), Don Wyclif. Chi Trib and Terry just can’t stay away from parlor-radical causes. The 10/17 piece even quotes that old parlor radical Studs Terkel – who shot off his mouth after 9/11 about U.S. airmen being terrorists, by the way – who thought highly of the pacifist in question, needless to say.
WE HAVE TO WONDER . . . Chi Trib’s lead business section story, “Anemic profits hurt vaccine supply: Development process deters makers: shortages could persist for decade,” raises questions. It’s all about the flu vaccine business not being profitable enough to justify investing in better technology that would solve mfg.-&-distribution problems. But the demand is huge; why can’t supply meet it? The story hints at a reason:
Companies have difficulty raising prices [essential to making the business attractive] because the government and public health agencies that buy much of the product would create a political stir.
Oh? What’s that all about? New products cost more until mass consumption brings them down, but that’s not allowed in this case?
Companies, though, say the federal government could go a long way to spur more interest in vaccine development.
Oh again. Spurring interest usually means making it profitable. The first move in that direction would be to cancel artificial inhibitions, one would think. Tax break maybe?
"Bush must overcome his mess in Iraq." His was an "ill-fated adventure into military conquest." He counts on "terrorism hysteria . . . as a political strategy." The nation is "already made skeptical by the 9/11 Commission report." The U.S. is in "low esteem" with "other nations."
Bush has "economic ideologues in his administration." There have been "record deficits under Bush.” A source says the war is "not going well" and "favors Kerry," even if he's "not in the lead now" because of it.
None of this was argued, just taken for granted.
FOLLOWING ONE’S LEAD . . . 8/20/04, Chi Trib finally reported on Swift Boat Vets v. Kerry – when Kerry brought it up. Was not news fit to print before that. Too yucky. Or a vampire requiring stake in heart, as Trib reporter Frank James told E&P. Was result of "too many" news sources out there, said Trib managing editor James O'Shea. Oh the trouble CT has seen, forced by raggedy-ass competition to cover this quite unseemly story about the candidate's tangled web.
Hey, did NYT cover it? No. So what's the problem?
A LEAGUE OF HIS OWN . . . And wasn't it grand the way Chi Trib's Eric Zorn referred hard-copy readers of his conventional stuff to his really interesting web-site stuff the other day, featuring reader reaction to something or other? Z. has dropped one of his columns to have more time for his web site, whose readership he compared (modestly) to hard-copy Chi Trib circulation but not to Instapundit or other performers in the blogosphere, in whose league he does not play. Not to mention Drudge Report, whose circulation exceeds Chi Trib's. Nonetheless, Z. should continue trying his hand at blogging. He's prolific. We have to give him that.
One of his problems, however, is he's heavy-handed. Tin ear and all that, a sort of Al Gore-like bombs-away delivering of facts on top of facts. Has no sense of merely suggesting, in part because he's still caught in the hard-copy mode of either plodding recitation or zany fun and games and in part perhaps because of his being a campus brat, which is not to say word one about his parents as persons but to point out the peculiar wordiness and head-tripping into which campus people fall more than your average person. Talking heads come to mind, but more a matter of mind going lickety split and leaving communication behind. Do I make myself clear?
Contrast Z., for instance, with the aforementioned ABC News’s The Note, in which Mark Halperin et al. pull lots of stuff together daily, summarizing and shorthanding pungently and wittily. There's a knack to that. It beats James Taranto's Best of the Web, I think, which also gets a bit complicated at times, even while performing indispensably.
ERNIE PYLE? . . . World War II battle reports in Chi Trib and other papers routinely led with numbers dead and wounded, driving home the losses incurred, the better to discourage the home front, as our world was called. Not quite. Instead, the news was about victories or setbacks, with emphasis on the first. But battle reports from Iraq and Afghanistan are mostly about casualties. Why?
FDR DONE IN . . . Point made by MSM (Main Stream Media) reporter in an email to Instapundit about Iraq coverage published 10/21:
It's frankly impossible to imagine what might have happened to FDR's presidency if WWII was covered the way the various news media do the job right now. Someone in the blogosphere recently pointed out that 750 American troops died in a training accident during preparations for D-Day. Can you imagine that? Today such an occurrence would have an almost apocalyptic impact in this country, if you consider the way it would be conveyed to the public through television.
HIGH-PRICED . . . The hit man was offered $20G and a city job, says Sun-Times head 10-14-04. The man wanted more than money, he wanted his license to steal.
WE CARE, WE CARE . . . 10/17/04 Sunday Chi Trib featured big in-your-face p-1 color pic of black victim (what else is new?) with story attacking reliability of finger-printing and other forensics measures. Trib Mag cover story same day was on gung-ho pacifist – ahem, peace activist – by the infamous Don Terry, whose story praising former terrorist and current advocate of terrorism William Ayers ran in the Mag on the Sunday after 9/11, requiring a trademark run-of-paper apology by Trib apologist-in-chief (who whines a lot), Don Wyclif. Chi Trib and Terry just can’t stay away from parlor-radical causes. The 10/17 piece even quotes that old parlor radical Studs Terkel – who shot off his mouth after 9/11 about U.S. airmen being terrorists, by the way – who thought highly of the pacifist in question, needless to say.
WE HAVE TO WONDER . . . Chi Trib’s lead business section story, “Anemic profits hurt vaccine supply: Development process deters makers: shortages could persist for decade,” raises questions. It’s all about the flu vaccine business not being profitable enough to justify investing in better technology that would solve mfg.-&-distribution problems. But the demand is huge; why can’t supply meet it? The story hints at a reason:
Companies have difficulty raising prices [essential to making the business attractive] because the government and public health agencies that buy much of the product would create a political stir.
Oh? What’s that all about? New products cost more until mass consumption brings them down, but that’s not allowed in this case?
Companies, though, say the federal government could go a long way to spur more interest in vaccine development.
Oh again. Spurring interest usually means making it profitable. The first move in that direction would be to cancel artificial inhibitions, one would think. Tax break maybe?
10/11/2004
Has any Chi newspaper picked up on this bit of business history, from The Scotsman? I don't think so.
============
FACT OF THE DAY
Today in 1887, American inventor Dorr Eugene Felt of Chicago patented the world's first adding machine, named the comptometer . The machine, made from a macaroni box, staples, elastic bands and meat skewers, resembled a weird xylophone - but it proved both reliable and accurate. Click here to read today's news on science and techonology.
============
FACT OF THE DAY
Today in 1887, American inventor Dorr Eugene Felt of Chicago patented the world's first adding machine, named the comptometer . The machine, made from a macaroni box, staples, elastic bands and meat skewers, resembled a weird xylophone - but it proved both reliable and accurate. Click here to read today's news on science and techonology.
10/10/2004
The blogosphere "looks a lot like what Free Speech advocates call the marketplace of ideas," says Kelly McBride of Poynter Institute in a 9/16/04 Poynter Online Ethics Journal article, "Journalism in the Age of Blogs."
No, it's "anarchy," says Chi Trib man. ed. James O'Shea. Whose side is Fussbudget O'Shea on, anyhow?
No, it's "anarchy," says Chi Trib man. ed. James O'Shea. Whose side is Fussbudget O'Shea on, anyhow?
10/08/2004
I like to render close reading to noosepaper stories. It helps me understand what I don't understand. Join me in this partial questioning of Chi Trib's Oct. 7 p-1 story, "Iraq in transition: Report on Iraq arms undercuts president," both as to sense and completeness, keeping in mind that the darn thing is done on deadline and in a newsroom climate that operates out of its own conventional wisdom:
IRAQ IN TRANSITION
Report on Iraq arms undercuts president
No evidence of WMD, terror link
By Stephen J. Hedges
Washington Bureau
October 7, 2004
WASHINGTON -- Drawing on an investigation that included interviews with Saddam Hussein and his former top aides, the government's chief weapons inspector has concluded that Iraq did not possess chemical, biological and nuclear weapons--or programs to build them--for more than a decade before the March 2003 U.S. invasion--a direct contradiction of President Bush's contention that the existence of such weapons justified the war. [rather, of his claim there were such weapons; he did make that claim, didn't he?]
In a report of nearly 1,000 pages, inspector Charles Duelfer said the Iraqi leader decided years ago to abandon active programs to develop and deploy banned weapons of mass destruction, but he sought to retain the capacity to quickly reconstitute those programs once United Nations scrutiny of his regime diminished. [but etc. graf belongs in lead? why not?]
But that work to reconstitute them had not begun by 2003, Duelfer said. And in the case of a program to develop nuclear weapons, Iraq's capacity to renew that effort had in fact greatly eroded, he said.
"What we have found on the ground is at a substantial variation from . . . the prewar assessments," Duelfer told members of the U.S. Senate Armed Service Committee on Wednesday. [assessments by whom? vigorously or otherwise contested by Dems, including Kerry?]
Duelfer's report notes that postwar inspections in Iraq have led to the conclusion that Iraq destroyed its long-range missiles and militarily significant chemical and biological weapons stocks in 1991 and 1992. [postwar, yes. but prewar?]
Iraq's nuclear weapons program effectively ended in 1991, the report states, but the inspectors did find "a limited number of post-1995 activities that would have aided the reconstitution of the nuclear weapons program once sanctions were lifted." [Oh? Interesting]
Had it been allowed to proceed, Duelfer's report states, Iraq could have restarted its chemical and biological weapons programs within months. [Should go higher up?] The nuclear effort, however, would have taken [also been started? been completed?] far longer, perhaps years.
Duelfer also told the committee that his investigation, conducted by 1,200 members of the U.S. Iraq Survey Group, found no evidence that Iraq had shared weapons technology or know-how with terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, another frequent prewar danger raised by administration officials. [and contested by Kerry et al.?]
On Wednesday, Bush again suggested that Iraq could have shared weapons with terrorists. [he had previously merely suggested this?]
. . . more more more . . .
IRAQ IN TRANSITION
Report on Iraq arms undercuts president
No evidence of WMD, terror link
By Stephen J. Hedges
Washington Bureau
October 7, 2004
WASHINGTON -- Drawing on an investigation that included interviews with Saddam Hussein and his former top aides, the government's chief weapons inspector has concluded that Iraq did not possess chemical, biological and nuclear weapons--or programs to build them--for more than a decade before the March 2003 U.S. invasion--a direct contradiction of President Bush's contention that the existence of such weapons justified the war. [rather, of his claim there were such weapons; he did make that claim, didn't he?]
In a report of nearly 1,000 pages, inspector Charles Duelfer said the Iraqi leader decided years ago to abandon active programs to develop and deploy banned weapons of mass destruction, but he sought to retain the capacity to quickly reconstitute those programs once United Nations scrutiny of his regime diminished. [but etc. graf belongs in lead? why not?]
But that work to reconstitute them had not begun by 2003, Duelfer said. And in the case of a program to develop nuclear weapons, Iraq's capacity to renew that effort had in fact greatly eroded, he said.
"What we have found on the ground is at a substantial variation from . . . the prewar assessments," Duelfer told members of the U.S. Senate Armed Service Committee on Wednesday. [assessments by whom? vigorously or otherwise contested by Dems, including Kerry?]
Duelfer's report notes that postwar inspections in Iraq have led to the conclusion that Iraq destroyed its long-range missiles and militarily significant chemical and biological weapons stocks in 1991 and 1992. [postwar, yes. but prewar?]
Iraq's nuclear weapons program effectively ended in 1991, the report states, but the inspectors did find "a limited number of post-1995 activities that would have aided the reconstitution of the nuclear weapons program once sanctions were lifted." [Oh? Interesting]
Had it been allowed to proceed, Duelfer's report states, Iraq could have restarted its chemical and biological weapons programs within months. [Should go higher up?] The nuclear effort, however, would have taken [also been started? been completed?] far longer, perhaps years.
Duelfer also told the committee that his investigation, conducted by 1,200 members of the U.S. Iraq Survey Group, found no evidence that Iraq had shared weapons technology or know-how with terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, another frequent prewar danger raised by administration officials. [and contested by Kerry et al.?]
On Wednesday, Bush again suggested that Iraq could have shared weapons with terrorists. [he had previously merely suggested this?]
. . . more more more . . .
9/30/2004
Today's Chi Trib has excellent editorial about the UN's "trademark fecklessness" as demonstrated in its standing by while 50,000 and more are slaughtered in Sudan. "The bugles of global impotence again sound retreat from a battle never joined," etc. It's the same "world body" that would have let Saddam continue in office but for alleged "unilateralism" by us and the coalition.
Do not count the Trib out while such editorials run.
Do not count the Trib out while such editorials run.
9/23/2004
Chi Trib had hot news the other day (Tues 9/21): "Kerry: Bush failed in Iraq." This is newspaper as morning shower or breakfast, as Marshall McLuhan termed it many years ago. Or is it news to Trib's news editors that Kerry says Bush is failing in Iraq? And they wonder why circulation is falling.
On the other hand, look at what Instapundit.com had at that very moment, sans links, which in some cases are needed to explain various short statements that nonetheless beat "Kerry: Bush failed," presented by Chi Trib as if it's news:
September 21, 2004
IRAQI BLOGGER ALI RESPONDS TO ROBERT NOVAK:
What does Mr. Novak know about Iraq and the decision makers in the USA? If his information about how decision makers in America are thinking, is similar to his information about Iraq, then I guess we are safe and there�s no need to worry.
Read the whole thing. I'm with Ali on this one.
posted at 08:14 AM by Glenn Reynolds
AND WE WANT THESE GUYS IN IRAQ?
Twelve French soldiers on peacekeeping duties in Ivory Coast have been arrested in connection with a bank theft there last week.
The troops had been assigned to protect a branch of the Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO) and were charged with stealing $120,000 (100,000 euros).
French military spokesman Colonel Henry Aussavy said the accused soldiers were being sent home to face French justice.
More than 4,000 French troops are serving alongside UN peacekeepers.
Sigh.
posted at 08:09 AM by Glenn Reynolds
WHERE NEXT FOR THE BLOGOSPHERE? Pejman Yousefzadeh has some thoughts.
posted at 08:07 AM by Glenn Reynolds
ANOTHER SUCCESS FOR DIPLOMACY?
Syria's ambassador to Washington said yesterday his country's forces in Lebanon will begin a major redeployment toward their own border this morning.
The diplomat also said Syrian and U.S. troops will partake in joint security operations along the Syrian-Iraqi border, although State Department officials contradicted that claim.
"This is official," said Imad Mustapha, Syria's ambassador to Washington, speaking by telephone from the Syrian capital. "Tuesday morning there will be a major redeployment of Syrian forces in Lebanon toward the border." . . .
A senior State Department official disputed the ambassador's statement last night.
"We are looking for Syria to take certain action to protect the border. That action has not been taken yet. We'll be working to improve Syria's performance," the official said. "At this point, that does not include joint actions with American troops."
Hmm. Stay tuned.
posted at 08:06 AM by Glenn Reynolds
TOM MAGUIRE is checking Joe Wilson's travel schedule.
posted at 07:32 AM by Glenn Reynolds
MICKEY KAUS IS ON FIRE, with posts on everything from RatherGate to polling.
posted at 07:29 AM by Glenn Reynolds
(more, more more)
On the other hand, look at what Instapundit.com had at that very moment, sans links, which in some cases are needed to explain various short statements that nonetheless beat "Kerry: Bush failed," presented by Chi Trib as if it's news:
September 21, 2004
IRAQI BLOGGER ALI RESPONDS TO ROBERT NOVAK:
What does Mr. Novak know about Iraq and the decision makers in the USA? If his information about how decision makers in America are thinking, is similar to his information about Iraq, then I guess we are safe and there�s no need to worry.
Read the whole thing. I'm with Ali on this one.
posted at 08:14 AM by Glenn Reynolds
AND WE WANT THESE GUYS IN IRAQ?
Twelve French soldiers on peacekeeping duties in Ivory Coast have been arrested in connection with a bank theft there last week.
The troops had been assigned to protect a branch of the Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO) and were charged with stealing $120,000 (100,000 euros).
French military spokesman Colonel Henry Aussavy said the accused soldiers were being sent home to face French justice.
More than 4,000 French troops are serving alongside UN peacekeepers.
Sigh.
posted at 08:09 AM by Glenn Reynolds
WHERE NEXT FOR THE BLOGOSPHERE? Pejman Yousefzadeh has some thoughts.
posted at 08:07 AM by Glenn Reynolds
ANOTHER SUCCESS FOR DIPLOMACY?
Syria's ambassador to Washington said yesterday his country's forces in Lebanon will begin a major redeployment toward their own border this morning.
The diplomat also said Syrian and U.S. troops will partake in joint security operations along the Syrian-Iraqi border, although State Department officials contradicted that claim.
"This is official," said Imad Mustapha, Syria's ambassador to Washington, speaking by telephone from the Syrian capital. "Tuesday morning there will be a major redeployment of Syrian forces in Lebanon toward the border." . . .
A senior State Department official disputed the ambassador's statement last night.
"We are looking for Syria to take certain action to protect the border. That action has not been taken yet. We'll be working to improve Syria's performance," the official said. "At this point, that does not include joint actions with American troops."
Hmm. Stay tuned.
posted at 08:06 AM by Glenn Reynolds
TOM MAGUIRE is checking Joe Wilson's travel schedule.
posted at 07:32 AM by Glenn Reynolds
MICKEY KAUS IS ON FIRE, with posts on everything from RatherGate to polling.
posted at 07:29 AM by Glenn Reynolds
(more, more more)
9/16/2004
Rush Limbaugh picked up the CBS-2 story (by Mike Flannery). Watch for it in tomorrow's papers; that's the usual cycle.
Wild, wild story from CBS Channel 2 last night: Bush, Kerry neck and neck in Illinois!
Picked up by no one so far. Chi Trib's O'Shea is waiting for NY Times to run it?
Picked up by no one so far. Chi Trib's O'Shea is waiting for NY Times to run it?
9/12/2004
WE HAPPY FEW READ IT . . . It was a historic day, 8/20/04, when Chi Trib finally reported on Vets v. Kerry � after Kerry brought it up. Claims by its public editor et al. that it�s a Republican paper ring hollow. In editorials, yes, and these are for the most part well thought and argued. But in news coverage, it�s a paper whose editors seem to wait for cues from Big Mama in NY (NY Times). I would call it a national wannabe newspaper.
So it was See Trib, see Trib run, See Trib run with Bush-National Guard story 9/9/04, complete with above-fold page-one pic and story.
As it ran with "Kerry lied" stories about medals and his �71 atrocity testimony in which he betrayed his band of brothers? (It didn't.)
Next day, while blogosphere picked away at the Natl Guard story, a CBS-Dan Rather original, Trib ran a back-paper NYT story that half way down addressed the spurious-document question. It�s how a Republican paper plays stories, right? (Not.)
Meanwhile, a Chi Trib desk editor, Wm. B. Rood, jumped into the fray with his account of his and J. Kerry�s Viet Nam war exploits, defending K. from Republican critics. Big Sunday page one treatment. This after agonizing by him a newsie for whom neutrality on the day�s issues is the bedrock principle. It isn�t?
Chi Trib managing editor Jim O�Shea ran Rood�s account after his own agonizing. It�s not easy to come out of the closet.
Coming up in Chi Trib: a full account with comparable play � "beyond words," as Trib ads promise � of the anti-Kerry side of the story! Bet?
GOING ON HALF EMPTY . . . On 8/20 Sun Times had this head about Republican senatorial candidate Alan Keyes at the state fair: "GOP Conservatives rally behind Keyes," while Chi Trib for same story had "GOP Lukewarm toward Keyes."
THE BEAUTY OF PRO-LIFE . . . Mary-Louise Kurey in Chi Trib letter to editor Saturday 9/4, responding to columnist Eric Zorn, says an Illinois law Z. had spoken of as protecting accidentally born abortion babies has been disallowed in courts.
She also suggests placing the accidental infant in the arms of a waiting adoptive parent. Her letter could have been an op-ed. She is the archdiocese�s point person for pro-life issues, a former beauty contest winner and looks it, and articulate. She or someone like her would make a good op-ed regular.
Wouldn't that be something?
WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE . . . Alan Keyes is a "convicted" person, says former Gov. Jim Edgar, meaning he has (presumably strong) convictions. Convinced is the word. But somewhere in the haze of my memory is "convicted" used this way by preachers. Maybe Edgar heard it used that way in a Baptist church.
Its sole use in the King James version, in John 8.9, does not support its use for "convinced": "And they which heard it, being convicted [usual sense] by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman [caught in adultery] standing in the midst."
MORE LANGUAGE . . . Do grand juries hand up or hand down indictments? 9/9/04 Sun-Times story said "handed down." What the heck is it?
MORE LANGUAGE, NATIONAL SCENE . . . From the nation at large comes the "foaming jerk" sobriquet devised by author-commentator Michelle Malkin for TV man Chris Matthews, hound of the Baskervilles revisited, who has something of a saliva, even spittle, problem. He got excited talking to her, and she narrowly missed catching some of the flying stuff in her face, she reports. The MSNBC worthy who followed Matthews, Keith Olbermann, commended him: "Never prouder of you, Chris." She had alluded to what the "Unfit" book says of Kerry�s self-inflicted wound (allegedly incurred by aiming his launcher short in his first action and catching some shrapnel as it bounced back, for which he was chewed out by the boat�s senior officer).
This reverberated in the misty flats of Matthews�s mind as "he shot himself." With this he pummeled Malkin, refusing to pay heed to her repeating "self-inflicted wound," which to most is not the same things. "The unfair, unbalanced, and unhinged purveyors of journalism, or whatever it is they call what they do at MSNBC, should be ashamed," fumed Malkin later.
"Democrat Party water boys in the media are in full desperation mode," she continued. "I have now witnessed firsthand and up close (Matthews' spittle nearly hit me in the face) how the pressure from alternative media sources � the blogosphere, conservative Internet forums, talk radio, Regnery Publishing, FOX News, etc. � is driving these people absolutely batty."
WHAT WAS SHE UP TO? . . . Olbermann suggested she was following orders from the Swift Boat Vets to "steer the Kerry-Shot-Himself flotsam into the mainstream media," but she had been booked for the show to push a book of her own about internment of Japanese in WW2 and racial profiling in general. But Matthews�s producer, Dominic Bellone, had told her they wanted first to talk about Swift Vets� accusations. (She never did get to talk about her book.) Olbermann, meet Bellone. You two work in the same shop, you should get to know each other.
It was later that the irrepressible Matthews, caught up in his street-theater shtick in Herald Square, asked Zell Miller if he really meant spitballs, as Miller had just said in his stirring, provocative speech, in which he accused Kerry of voting against a string of weapons. Miller tried to explain metaphorical language to the hopped-up Matthews, but Matthews was having too much fun with fellow Democrats outside the Garden. Shortly after that, Miller raised the duel-in-the-sun idea, wishing they were both back in Georgia, where men fought it out.
IDEA ALERT . . . Well it is fun, when you get down to it, though not for the likes of Malkin and Miller. It�s not as much fun, however, as if Matthews and the irrepressible Bill O'Reilly were to do a show together, flipping for home field, and not in Herald Square. Matthews, who has about one-fifth the viewers if that many as O'Reilly, would be wise for rating�s sake to appear in O'Reilly�s home court.
Wherever it was held, it would be quite something � a series of interruptions interrupted by interruptions. You don�t have to be Irish � a Jewish friend told me his family specialized in fingers waved in each other�s faces � but I do know some commented on the noise my three brothers and I used to make while conversing with each other, and each of us pleads or pleaded guilty to being Irish. Be that as it may, a O'Reilly vs. Matthews card would be a sellout.
DOWD SPEAKS . . . Also from elsewhere, call-in radio host Brian Lehrer on WNYC in NYC on 9/2/04 [had a tip from the producer] told Maureen Dowd she had looked into Bush's soul � what Z. Miller said he had done � in her NYT columns. She denied it but right off began to tell what Bush was thinking.
All in all, Dowd made a good on-air interview, being an entertaining speaker, though a prisoner of metaphor and utterly liberal. She is also apparently unaware of her biases, rather her contradictions, as what I mentioned earlier, about not looking into souls. She does that all the time, and extrapolates wildly, sees White House as Addams mansion, etc., which is entertaining, I admit.
On the open-minded side, she sees Bushies as more credible in their threat to destroy terrorists than Edwards, for instance, but finds them "scary." Lehrer did not ask if there's a connection between making credible threats and being scary.
She finds Bushies vicious � Kerry knew Bush would try to "rip his throat out" � but mentions Clinton aide Carville without reference to his well-known tactics. She endorses all suspicions of homophobia, as in Arnold�s conceivably self-mocking convention-speech girlie-boy references. Listening to her gives a very good look at what's said at parties I'm not invited to. Not to say I'm invited to any.
She�s full of "subtext" readings, stuff she just knows, that�s all. She refers to "don't put me on couch" complaints by Bush pere but claims her analysis of the younger Bush � starting the whole damn Iraq war in part to one-up his father, for instance � is what anyone would conclude.
Anyone at one of those parties anyhow � like those of an earlier generation that film critic Pauline Kael attended (and Roger Ebert surely attends today), where nobody voted for Nixon the year he took all but Massachusetts. It�s fun being a liberal.
YET MORE OUTSIDE CHI . . . Barely noticed by main streamers was the AP story out of West Allis WI reporting boos from Bush-supporters at hearing Bush tell of Clinton�s heart trouble. When the boos evaporated in the wake of numerous witnesses� outraged complaints, AP pulled the story. But it had gone out to clients and ran in a number of places. The blogosphere doused the story and along the way took aim at a Knight-Ridder story out of Washington by science writer Seth Borenstein, whose head was sought on the platter following that of a reporter named Hays of AP, the West Allis perp.
I twitted Borenstein, whom I do not know, in an email, and he explained credibly how he had slipped the AP report into a story about Clinton, on deadline. He goofed, and knew it, "a rushed reporter stupidly � and in error � using an AP story in half a sentence and not crediting AP."
NEWSIES IN GENERAL . . . Tony Blair compared dealing with the media to living with "a demented tenant." You don�t know "whether to charm them or knock them over the head," as noted by Steve Richards, chief political commentator of UK�s Independent, reviewing a new Blair biography in Times Literary Supplement.
Or as Jacques Barzun observed in From Dawn to Decadence, "to public figures [the media resembles] a dog of uncertain temper, pacified by fresh news."
BACK ON THE HOME FRONT . . . Sun-Times Labor Day page one had big pic of beautiful beach-volleyballer's Speedo-covered butt, which was also very interesting. In same edition, sports columnist Mariotti refers to Cubs� "fragile team psyche," which is maybe a sports version of Maureen Dowd analyzing Bush?
So it was See Trib, see Trib run, See Trib run with Bush-National Guard story 9/9/04, complete with above-fold page-one pic and story.
As it ran with "Kerry lied" stories about medals and his �71 atrocity testimony in which he betrayed his band of brothers? (It didn't.)
Next day, while blogosphere picked away at the Natl Guard story, a CBS-Dan Rather original, Trib ran a back-paper NYT story that half way down addressed the spurious-document question. It�s how a Republican paper plays stories, right? (Not.)
Meanwhile, a Chi Trib desk editor, Wm. B. Rood, jumped into the fray with his account of his and J. Kerry�s Viet Nam war exploits, defending K. from Republican critics. Big Sunday page one treatment. This after agonizing by him a newsie for whom neutrality on the day�s issues is the bedrock principle. It isn�t?
Chi Trib managing editor Jim O�Shea ran Rood�s account after his own agonizing. It�s not easy to come out of the closet.
Coming up in Chi Trib: a full account with comparable play � "beyond words," as Trib ads promise � of the anti-Kerry side of the story! Bet?
GOING ON HALF EMPTY . . . On 8/20 Sun Times had this head about Republican senatorial candidate Alan Keyes at the state fair: "GOP Conservatives rally behind Keyes," while Chi Trib for same story had "GOP Lukewarm toward Keyes."
THE BEAUTY OF PRO-LIFE . . . Mary-Louise Kurey in Chi Trib letter to editor Saturday 9/4, responding to columnist Eric Zorn, says an Illinois law Z. had spoken of as protecting accidentally born abortion babies has been disallowed in courts.
She also suggests placing the accidental infant in the arms of a waiting adoptive parent. Her letter could have been an op-ed. She is the archdiocese�s point person for pro-life issues, a former beauty contest winner and looks it, and articulate. She or someone like her would make a good op-ed regular.
Wouldn't that be something?
WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE . . . Alan Keyes is a "convicted" person, says former Gov. Jim Edgar, meaning he has (presumably strong) convictions. Convinced is the word. But somewhere in the haze of my memory is "convicted" used this way by preachers. Maybe Edgar heard it used that way in a Baptist church.
Its sole use in the King James version, in John 8.9, does not support its use for "convinced": "And they which heard it, being convicted [usual sense] by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman [caught in adultery] standing in the midst."
MORE LANGUAGE . . . Do grand juries hand up or hand down indictments? 9/9/04 Sun-Times story said "handed down." What the heck is it?
MORE LANGUAGE, NATIONAL SCENE . . . From the nation at large comes the "foaming jerk" sobriquet devised by author-commentator Michelle Malkin for TV man Chris Matthews, hound of the Baskervilles revisited, who has something of a saliva, even spittle, problem. He got excited talking to her, and she narrowly missed catching some of the flying stuff in her face, she reports. The MSNBC worthy who followed Matthews, Keith Olbermann, commended him: "Never prouder of you, Chris." She had alluded to what the "Unfit" book says of Kerry�s self-inflicted wound (allegedly incurred by aiming his launcher short in his first action and catching some shrapnel as it bounced back, for which he was chewed out by the boat�s senior officer).
This reverberated in the misty flats of Matthews�s mind as "he shot himself." With this he pummeled Malkin, refusing to pay heed to her repeating "self-inflicted wound," which to most is not the same things. "The unfair, unbalanced, and unhinged purveyors of journalism, or whatever it is they call what they do at MSNBC, should be ashamed," fumed Malkin later.
"Democrat Party water boys in the media are in full desperation mode," she continued. "I have now witnessed firsthand and up close (Matthews' spittle nearly hit me in the face) how the pressure from alternative media sources � the blogosphere, conservative Internet forums, talk radio, Regnery Publishing, FOX News, etc. � is driving these people absolutely batty."
WHAT WAS SHE UP TO? . . . Olbermann suggested she was following orders from the Swift Boat Vets to "steer the Kerry-Shot-Himself flotsam into the mainstream media," but she had been booked for the show to push a book of her own about internment of Japanese in WW2 and racial profiling in general. But Matthews�s producer, Dominic Bellone, had told her they wanted first to talk about Swift Vets� accusations. (She never did get to talk about her book.) Olbermann, meet Bellone. You two work in the same shop, you should get to know each other.
It was later that the irrepressible Matthews, caught up in his street-theater shtick in Herald Square, asked Zell Miller if he really meant spitballs, as Miller had just said in his stirring, provocative speech, in which he accused Kerry of voting against a string of weapons. Miller tried to explain metaphorical language to the hopped-up Matthews, but Matthews was having too much fun with fellow Democrats outside the Garden. Shortly after that, Miller raised the duel-in-the-sun idea, wishing they were both back in Georgia, where men fought it out.
IDEA ALERT . . . Well it is fun, when you get down to it, though not for the likes of Malkin and Miller. It�s not as much fun, however, as if Matthews and the irrepressible Bill O'Reilly were to do a show together, flipping for home field, and not in Herald Square. Matthews, who has about one-fifth the viewers if that many as O'Reilly, would be wise for rating�s sake to appear in O'Reilly�s home court.
Wherever it was held, it would be quite something � a series of interruptions interrupted by interruptions. You don�t have to be Irish � a Jewish friend told me his family specialized in fingers waved in each other�s faces � but I do know some commented on the noise my three brothers and I used to make while conversing with each other, and each of us pleads or pleaded guilty to being Irish. Be that as it may, a O'Reilly vs. Matthews card would be a sellout.
DOWD SPEAKS . . . Also from elsewhere, call-in radio host Brian Lehrer on WNYC in NYC on 9/2/04 [had a tip from the producer] told Maureen Dowd she had looked into Bush's soul � what Z. Miller said he had done � in her NYT columns. She denied it but right off began to tell what Bush was thinking.
All in all, Dowd made a good on-air interview, being an entertaining speaker, though a prisoner of metaphor and utterly liberal. She is also apparently unaware of her biases, rather her contradictions, as what I mentioned earlier, about not looking into souls. She does that all the time, and extrapolates wildly, sees White House as Addams mansion, etc., which is entertaining, I admit.
On the open-minded side, she sees Bushies as more credible in their threat to destroy terrorists than Edwards, for instance, but finds them "scary." Lehrer did not ask if there's a connection between making credible threats and being scary.
She finds Bushies vicious � Kerry knew Bush would try to "rip his throat out" � but mentions Clinton aide Carville without reference to his well-known tactics. She endorses all suspicions of homophobia, as in Arnold�s conceivably self-mocking convention-speech girlie-boy references. Listening to her gives a very good look at what's said at parties I'm not invited to. Not to say I'm invited to any.
She�s full of "subtext" readings, stuff she just knows, that�s all. She refers to "don't put me on couch" complaints by Bush pere but claims her analysis of the younger Bush � starting the whole damn Iraq war in part to one-up his father, for instance � is what anyone would conclude.
Anyone at one of those parties anyhow � like those of an earlier generation that film critic Pauline Kael attended (and Roger Ebert surely attends today), where nobody voted for Nixon the year he took all but Massachusetts. It�s fun being a liberal.
YET MORE OUTSIDE CHI . . . Barely noticed by main streamers was the AP story out of West Allis WI reporting boos from Bush-supporters at hearing Bush tell of Clinton�s heart trouble. When the boos evaporated in the wake of numerous witnesses� outraged complaints, AP pulled the story. But it had gone out to clients and ran in a number of places. The blogosphere doused the story and along the way took aim at a Knight-Ridder story out of Washington by science writer Seth Borenstein, whose head was sought on the platter following that of a reporter named Hays of AP, the West Allis perp.
I twitted Borenstein, whom I do not know, in an email, and he explained credibly how he had slipped the AP report into a story about Clinton, on deadline. He goofed, and knew it, "a rushed reporter stupidly � and in error � using an AP story in half a sentence and not crediting AP."
NEWSIES IN GENERAL . . . Tony Blair compared dealing with the media to living with "a demented tenant." You don�t know "whether to charm them or knock them over the head," as noted by Steve Richards, chief political commentator of UK�s Independent, reviewing a new Blair biography in Times Literary Supplement.
Or as Jacques Barzun observed in From Dawn to Decadence, "to public figures [the media resembles] a dog of uncertain temper, pacified by fresh news."
BACK ON THE HOME FRONT . . . Sun-Times Labor Day page one had big pic of beautiful beach-volleyballer's Speedo-covered butt, which was also very interesting. In same edition, sports columnist Mariotti refers to Cubs� "fragile team psyche," which is maybe a sports version of Maureen Dowd analyzing Bush?
8/13/2004
INOCULATED . . . Terrorists had "impunity" in the �90s, said Richard S. Williamson in 7/26 Sun-Times op-ed, meaning they got away with terrorism. Try "immunity." Having it, they acted with impunity.
FROM ATLANTA WITH LOVE . . . Chi Trib 7/6/04 had page-one story about a Dallas-based minister who gave a 90-minute sermon in Atlanta as part of his crusade. This is T.D. Jakes, who is a bishop though apparently not of any denomination. Trib's Dahleen Glanton does not say who consecrated him. Apostolic succession, anyone?
Contributing to the confusion is his name, Jakes, which is also the name of a prominent Chicago South Side minister, in the news a lot as a Reverend Protestor and even once-mayoral candidate. Glanton, Chi Trib's gal in Atlanta, makes no mention of the Chicago Jakes, nor did a Trib copy editor supply such a mention.
This Jakes of Atlanta and Dallas is "one of the most powerful religious figures in America," Glanton, attributing the judgment to no one and in effect calling on us to recognize her as one of the most astute observers of the religious scene in America.
In any case, Bishop Jakes on the road draws audiences of "sometimes triple the size" of his 28,000-member Dallas church. In Atlanta, for instance, he pulled more than 130,000, says Glanton � Charlotte Observer said more than 100,000 � to his four-day Mega Fest last month. The city was expected to pick up $100 million in business from it, said Glanton.
These thousands are boomers without ties, not afraid of mass meetings as the WW2 generation was, according to Emory U. sociologist Nancy Eiesland, whom Glanton quoted without mention of crowds who turned up to see the Pope in the last 25 years. Has Glanton heard about them?
The ties in question would be those that bind to a local church. This mega event, a gathering of people of various or no affiliation, was a religiously mixed crowd, Eiesland pointed out. They came for "lively worship [in a] more evangelical setting" -- more than what they find in their churches, apparently, but Glanton does not probe.
She says Jakes is called "in the media" a new Billy Graham. Can't she think of one such reference with which to regale us?
Jakes also "stretches the line too far between the secular and the spiritual," she tells us ("some say so"), but we are not told what it means to stretch a line too far between two things. What does Glanton have in mind? Does she realize a metaphor is supposed to make sense? Or is she just mouthing stuff she has heard that looks as if it belongs here?
She speaks of "those who have studied" Jakes who "say he fully understands his influence" on listeners. Who are they, and how do they know this? And so what? You'd think she was protecting a source.
Jakes "carefully crafts his words" -- "chooses them" would do -- "as well as his positions." That is, he watches what he says and is careful about positions he takes.
He's not the only one. Glanton does not report Jakes's anti-gay views mentioned in the 7/7 Southern Voice, a gay-oriented publication, which criticizes Atlanta�s Journal Constitution for, booster-like, failing to report on his hostility to homosexuality.
Neither does Glanton, representing not a local newspaper emphasizing the positive, but one with national-coverage pretensions. If she could think harder-headed and in a more detached manner about her subject, readers of her paper would hear more of the story.
STARS IN REVIEW . . . "Fahrenheit 9/11" is more "dramatization" than "expose," says Roger Ebert in 6/24/04 Sun-Times. Accurate or not, he doesn�t say. Ebert makes much of the look on Bush's face when he heard of the attacks on 9-11, calling it "odd indeed." Which is devastating indeed, coming from America's Movie Critic.
Ebert credits Moore with bringing "fresh impact to familiar material by the way he marshals his images." I'm sure he does. He's been compared to Leni Riefenstahl, Hitler�s world-class movie propagandist.
F-9/11 is "compelling, persuasive," says Ebert. That is, Ebert was compelled and persuaded. Bush "comes across [to E.] as shallow, inarticulate . . . simplistic. . . inauthentic," confirming Ebert�s deepest suspicions.
Moore had been "sobered by attacks on the factual accuracy of elements" of "Bowling for Columbine." Sobered, eh? E. reported this? "Moore sobered by attacks," read all about it? Ebert credits this new-found sobriety with Moore's "maybe" being "more cautious" in this film, producing "an op-ed . . . not stand-up comedy." A good op-ed? Accurate and well argued?
"But," and here the real Roger Ebert stands up, "he remains one of the most valuable figures on the political landscape, a populist rabble-rouser, humorous and effective." The film is "exhilarating," thanks to its "determined repetition of . . . sound bites."
Doesn�t that depend on what you mean by exhilarating?
SCHOOL DAZE . . . In Chicago we have "failing schools," never failing teachers, parents, and students. One expedient, an experiment in parental control and parent-school cooperation known as Local School Councils, has flopped. Nine years of Daley-era reform went down the drain. Reformist (call them reformers if things get reformed) Julie Woestehoff says the schools scene is a "shambles."
Sun-Times tells of charter schools where kids toe the line and have longer school days and tight discipline � apparently a real character-molding program. Daley, thrashing about as usual, says he wants more like these. But they make heavy demands on students and parents, and one wonders how many would put up with that.
A NAME�S A NAME, FOR ALL THAT . . . When is a liberal not a liberal? When he's a Republican, in which case he's a moderate. Ask Dave McKinney of Sun-Times, who 6/27/04 has the GOP Ryan-replacement story � Jack Ryan the nominee had to pull out when Chi Trib got hold of sex-club allegations in his divorce proceedings, Repubs had to scramble for a replacement.
Idea: provide standard check list: voting record, campaign statements, the usual items � and compare a well-known moderate with a well-known liberal. Or five mods with five libs, to allow for varieties of records, and see what the difference is.
GUESS WHAT? . . . Mary Mitchell in Sun-Times had this just in during the convention: Hillary full of praise for Obama�s talk. How does she get those scoops?
UNLOCKING KEYES . . . Sun-Times man Mark Brown dismissed Alan Keyes, Republicans� great black hope for the coming senate race, as a "conservative talk-show host," saying nothing of his Harvard Ph.D. and UNESCO appointment (ambassador) and even more contemptuously comparing him to Mike Ditka: "He�s no Ditka, but he could get there from here." From Harvard, no less!
Mary Mitchell told us Republicans had played the race card in slating Keyes, amateurishly citing "political observers," as if to remove it from the realm of what she thinks. She decried the dearth of "white lambs" for sacrifice in this election. Keyes�s role is "to limit votes" for Obama. Really?
Keyes was picked for "his national presence, his talk show, and his wit." How dare they?
She worries that blacks may see in him a black candidate of whom they can be proud � and he will be a right-winger!
Dem consultant Don Rose told her Keyes is "fanatical" and has no "relationship ideology to the black community." Relationship ideology? Moreover, Keyes has gotten votes in his presidential campaigns from the Bible Belt. Saints preserve us.
ADVICE . . . They are upset. Alarms have gone off. This guy will drag out horses libs think they have beaten to death: Is abortion murder? Do we belong in the UN? Should immigration laws be enforced? Keyes will try to force issues, but getting himself fully reported may not be easy.
Reporters who can�t stomach him should lay out his most egregious arguments, fairly and squarely, assuming he will hang himself. His supporters will love it, even as his opposition feels vindicated. I did that once for Jehovah�s Witnesses in Sox Park 35 years ago, when 40,000 of them gathered there for a week. Our first editions were hawked outside the park as they arrived.
I hesitated at first to report fully what they were saying � their elaborate cosmogony, for instance, sounded so silly. Why make these nice people look bad? But the killer instinct took hold, and I decided to feature their wildest asseverations, punching up the story with what they gave me.
Next day, I showed up at the press box, the day�s paper already in thousands of hands, unsure of my reception. Lo and behold, they greeted me effusively, delighted at the coverage. I had accurately represented their thinking. Most readers clucked and shook their heads, but not they.
One thing newsies should not do is worry about Keyes being "divisive." That�s for the Dem senator, Durbin, and others to stew about. K is "of the right wing of the right wing," says Durbin. His approach is "divisive." Hang on to your wallets, by the way, when an odds-on favorite inveighs against division.
#
FROM ATLANTA WITH LOVE . . . Chi Trib 7/6/04 had page-one story about a Dallas-based minister who gave a 90-minute sermon in Atlanta as part of his crusade. This is T.D. Jakes, who is a bishop though apparently not of any denomination. Trib's Dahleen Glanton does not say who consecrated him. Apostolic succession, anyone?
Contributing to the confusion is his name, Jakes, which is also the name of a prominent Chicago South Side minister, in the news a lot as a Reverend Protestor and even once-mayoral candidate. Glanton, Chi Trib's gal in Atlanta, makes no mention of the Chicago Jakes, nor did a Trib copy editor supply such a mention.
This Jakes of Atlanta and Dallas is "one of the most powerful religious figures in America," Glanton, attributing the judgment to no one and in effect calling on us to recognize her as one of the most astute observers of the religious scene in America.
In any case, Bishop Jakes on the road draws audiences of "sometimes triple the size" of his 28,000-member Dallas church. In Atlanta, for instance, he pulled more than 130,000, says Glanton � Charlotte Observer said more than 100,000 � to his four-day Mega Fest last month. The city was expected to pick up $100 million in business from it, said Glanton.
These thousands are boomers without ties, not afraid of mass meetings as the WW2 generation was, according to Emory U. sociologist Nancy Eiesland, whom Glanton quoted without mention of crowds who turned up to see the Pope in the last 25 years. Has Glanton heard about them?
The ties in question would be those that bind to a local church. This mega event, a gathering of people of various or no affiliation, was a religiously mixed crowd, Eiesland pointed out. They came for "lively worship [in a] more evangelical setting" -- more than what they find in their churches, apparently, but Glanton does not probe.
She says Jakes is called "in the media" a new Billy Graham. Can't she think of one such reference with which to regale us?
Jakes also "stretches the line too far between the secular and the spiritual," she tells us ("some say so"), but we are not told what it means to stretch a line too far between two things. What does Glanton have in mind? Does she realize a metaphor is supposed to make sense? Or is she just mouthing stuff she has heard that looks as if it belongs here?
She speaks of "those who have studied" Jakes who "say he fully understands his influence" on listeners. Who are they, and how do they know this? And so what? You'd think she was protecting a source.
Jakes "carefully crafts his words" -- "chooses them" would do -- "as well as his positions." That is, he watches what he says and is careful about positions he takes.
He's not the only one. Glanton does not report Jakes's anti-gay views mentioned in the 7/7 Southern Voice, a gay-oriented publication, which criticizes Atlanta�s Journal Constitution for, booster-like, failing to report on his hostility to homosexuality.
Neither does Glanton, representing not a local newspaper emphasizing the positive, but one with national-coverage pretensions. If she could think harder-headed and in a more detached manner about her subject, readers of her paper would hear more of the story.
STARS IN REVIEW . . . "Fahrenheit 9/11" is more "dramatization" than "expose," says Roger Ebert in 6/24/04 Sun-Times. Accurate or not, he doesn�t say. Ebert makes much of the look on Bush's face when he heard of the attacks on 9-11, calling it "odd indeed." Which is devastating indeed, coming from America's Movie Critic.
Ebert credits Moore with bringing "fresh impact to familiar material by the way he marshals his images." I'm sure he does. He's been compared to Leni Riefenstahl, Hitler�s world-class movie propagandist.
F-9/11 is "compelling, persuasive," says Ebert. That is, Ebert was compelled and persuaded. Bush "comes across [to E.] as shallow, inarticulate . . . simplistic. . . inauthentic," confirming Ebert�s deepest suspicions.
Moore had been "sobered by attacks on the factual accuracy of elements" of "Bowling for Columbine." Sobered, eh? E. reported this? "Moore sobered by attacks," read all about it? Ebert credits this new-found sobriety with Moore's "maybe" being "more cautious" in this film, producing "an op-ed . . . not stand-up comedy." A good op-ed? Accurate and well argued?
"But," and here the real Roger Ebert stands up, "he remains one of the most valuable figures on the political landscape, a populist rabble-rouser, humorous and effective." The film is "exhilarating," thanks to its "determined repetition of . . . sound bites."
Doesn�t that depend on what you mean by exhilarating?
SCHOOL DAZE . . . In Chicago we have "failing schools," never failing teachers, parents, and students. One expedient, an experiment in parental control and parent-school cooperation known as Local School Councils, has flopped. Nine years of Daley-era reform went down the drain. Reformist (call them reformers if things get reformed) Julie Woestehoff says the schools scene is a "shambles."
Sun-Times tells of charter schools where kids toe the line and have longer school days and tight discipline � apparently a real character-molding program. Daley, thrashing about as usual, says he wants more like these. But they make heavy demands on students and parents, and one wonders how many would put up with that.
A NAME�S A NAME, FOR ALL THAT . . . When is a liberal not a liberal? When he's a Republican, in which case he's a moderate. Ask Dave McKinney of Sun-Times, who 6/27/04 has the GOP Ryan-replacement story � Jack Ryan the nominee had to pull out when Chi Trib got hold of sex-club allegations in his divorce proceedings, Repubs had to scramble for a replacement.
Idea: provide standard check list: voting record, campaign statements, the usual items � and compare a well-known moderate with a well-known liberal. Or five mods with five libs, to allow for varieties of records, and see what the difference is.
GUESS WHAT? . . . Mary Mitchell in Sun-Times had this just in during the convention: Hillary full of praise for Obama�s talk. How does she get those scoops?
UNLOCKING KEYES . . . Sun-Times man Mark Brown dismissed Alan Keyes, Republicans� great black hope for the coming senate race, as a "conservative talk-show host," saying nothing of his Harvard Ph.D. and UNESCO appointment (ambassador) and even more contemptuously comparing him to Mike Ditka: "He�s no Ditka, but he could get there from here." From Harvard, no less!
Mary Mitchell told us Republicans had played the race card in slating Keyes, amateurishly citing "political observers," as if to remove it from the realm of what she thinks. She decried the dearth of "white lambs" for sacrifice in this election. Keyes�s role is "to limit votes" for Obama. Really?
Keyes was picked for "his national presence, his talk show, and his wit." How dare they?
She worries that blacks may see in him a black candidate of whom they can be proud � and he will be a right-winger!
Dem consultant Don Rose told her Keyes is "fanatical" and has no "relationship ideology to the black community." Relationship ideology? Moreover, Keyes has gotten votes in his presidential campaigns from the Bible Belt. Saints preserve us.
ADVICE . . . They are upset. Alarms have gone off. This guy will drag out horses libs think they have beaten to death: Is abortion murder? Do we belong in the UN? Should immigration laws be enforced? Keyes will try to force issues, but getting himself fully reported may not be easy.
Reporters who can�t stomach him should lay out his most egregious arguments, fairly and squarely, assuming he will hang himself. His supporters will love it, even as his opposition feels vindicated. I did that once for Jehovah�s Witnesses in Sox Park 35 years ago, when 40,000 of them gathered there for a week. Our first editions were hawked outside the park as they arrived.
I hesitated at first to report fully what they were saying � their elaborate cosmogony, for instance, sounded so silly. Why make these nice people look bad? But the killer instinct took hold, and I decided to feature their wildest asseverations, punching up the story with what they gave me.
Next day, I showed up at the press box, the day�s paper already in thousands of hands, unsure of my reception. Lo and behold, they greeted me effusively, delighted at the coverage. I had accurately represented their thinking. Most readers clucked and shook their heads, but not they.
One thing newsies should not do is worry about Keyes being "divisive." That�s for the Dem senator, Durbin, and others to stew about. K is "of the right wing of the right wing," says Durbin. His approach is "divisive." Hang on to your wallets, by the way, when an odds-on favorite inveighs against division.
#
8/02/2004
Now is the time . . . Eric Zorn's column of yesterday was a brave effort to fill space. Too much space, I think. But I'll be darned, I count them and find it's only 725 words. Then today Neil Steinberg got it done in -- say wha'? -- 1165 words! Then why should Zorn's seem longer? One reason is he was trying too hard to convert sow's ear to silk purse. His was a brave attempt, I say. He remained effervescent in the face of a scripted largely news-free convention. Wait. Not so. If there are a million stories in the naked city, there have to be a hundred in a political convention, no matter how scripted.
Whether the earnest, hard-working Zorn found them is another question. On this day at least, it seems he did not. (I can hear him expostulating: "It seems"? What do you mean "it seems"? You're not going to go on how things "seem," are you?) He made one point very clear: The word "great" gets overused by enthusiastic public figures. This is something a few of us may not have noticed, and maybe we haven't seen the Joan Cusack commercial for DIRECTV, she weighing and balancing "great" and other adjectival possibilities.
Never mind. We read on and find there's something Zorn wants to say. There's another word. Barack Obama used "serious" when Z. asked him if the Ditka candidacy ever had him worried (it didn't) and so did Hillary C. , about Kerry -- "a serious man for a serious job at a serious time." Yess! Slam-dunk time! That's the word for Z. That "serious" (not "great," for God's sake!) sums it up in this "fraught and perilous" time.
But here the literacy alarm goes off. Eric has to hit the old dictionary. He has to see "fraught" as going "with" something, as in "fraught with peril." Fraught and perilous, on the other hand, veers close to Michael Sneed malaprop land. Eric does not want to go there.
He makes his point, however. Throw enough words up there in the more or less right direction, and we get it, somehow. We can even picture that "security [tea] cozy" he sees covering Boston, because we saw one once in a roadside antiques store and another in an old movie (the best kind). It's quite an image, the sort that comes to mind in the middle of the night -- the city of Boston, 700,000 people, under a tea cozy -- causing dismay or maybe a chuckle if nothing you ate disagrees with you. It stays with the reader when the column, serious though it may be, is long forgotten.
And Zorn gets serious, yea sober, at the end. He even waxes enthusiastic, proclaiming that it was "great, truly great" to be at this convention, "despite all the surface frivolity, phoniness, pointless ritual and sandbox fighting." (Oh that sandox fighting. Don't you just hate it?) It's a moral, by gum, with maybe a slight catch in the throat. Go, Eric. You've lumbered along and got through it, and you have your 725 words, and a happy ending to boot.
7/31/2004
Buy Chi Trib this morning even if Eric Zorn isn't in it, for the guest cartoons, specifically two out of Atlanta, one by Luckovich of the Journal-Constitution showing Edwards being commended at the recent political meeting: "Great speech! A jury just awarded Kerry $25 million." Edwards being a first-rate ambulance-chaser. (And I understand Kerry served in Viet Nam. Is that right?)
The other, by Robert Ariall of the Columbia SC The State, has Kerry at podium in front of big sign, "Tell Bush to SHOVE IT," and one donkey telling another, "I feel better now that we have a unifying message that clearly states our vision."
Meanwhile, it's Saturday at Sun-Times, where circulation is up or down, whatever, and Thomas Roeser expatiates knowledgeably about this week's resolution of the state budget impasse, telling how House Republican leader Tom Cross of Oswego led horses to the drink and got them to swallow, with House Speaker Mike (Big Daddy) Madigan ending "wiser but sadder." Typical informed analysis by one of the city's best.
The other, by Robert Ariall of the Columbia SC The State, has Kerry at podium in front of big sign, "Tell Bush to SHOVE IT," and one donkey telling another, "I feel better now that we have a unifying message that clearly states our vision."
Meanwhile, it's Saturday at Sun-Times, where circulation is up or down, whatever, and Thomas Roeser expatiates knowledgeably about this week's resolution of the state budget impasse, telling how House Republican leader Tom Cross of Oswego led horses to the drink and got them to swallow, with House Speaker Mike (Big Daddy) Madigan ending "wiser but sadder." Typical informed analysis by one of the city's best.
7/21/2004
THE ZORN-TRICE REPLY
Chi Trib's Eric Zorn comes to the rescue in his blog of his colleague Dawn Turner Trice, who says it wasn't she who tried to kill a Royko column for using "monkey" as applied by bad-guy LA cops to blacks, as I posted here 5/19. The word she objected to was the N-word, she says.
I still can't bring myself to say the word, because as Trice argued in her 5/3 column, it's unbearably hurtful even when the writer distances himself from it, as she admits Royko did -- which was mighty wide of her, to use an expression from my youth. (I thought that's what it was, at any rate, never seeing it in writing and thinking it was wide as in wide- or broad-minded. Actually it was white! As soon as I realized that, I stopped saying it. I swear!) Trice, however, uses it with abandon, defiantly, in Zorn's blog (twice!), accusing me and Steinberg of lacking the courage to do so.
Never mind. The key point made by Trice is that she's not the one former Chi Trib managing editor Dick Ciccone wrote about in his Royko: a Life in Print. It was someone else, says Trice. So Ciccone missed the time she tried to get a column killed! It's all clear now. Dawn T. Trice has been wronged and has my deepest apologies!
And Ciccone will be stunned to hear it. He did a book in which he recalled in detail, down to his stopping presses and making the paper come out late so as to restore the column killed by an editor whom he names, demonstrating attention to detail. He was there. He restored it. But he misses the one about Dawn T. Trice. There were two such cases, and he got only one! Maybe there were three or four others, and he missed them! There goes Ciccone, hanging his head in shame.
In any case, Trice admits, yea, boasts, that she tried to get a Royko column killed to protect readers' imagined sensibilities -- but no reader complained, Ciccone noted. The pigmy went for the giant and almost pulled it off.
[Zorn replied, quoting my above "deepest apologies," said my apology is "grudging," which seems a willful misreading of an ironical comment. It's not an apology at all, of course; and the need to point it out is not something one expects to encounter in urbane intercourse. In a debate with sophomore, yes. Or a sophist. Or a brat.]
Chi Trib's Eric Zorn comes to the rescue in his blog of his colleague Dawn Turner Trice, who says it wasn't she who tried to kill a Royko column for using "monkey" as applied by bad-guy LA cops to blacks, as I posted here 5/19. The word she objected to was the N-word, she says.
I still can't bring myself to say the word, because as Trice argued in her 5/3 column, it's unbearably hurtful even when the writer distances himself from it, as she admits Royko did -- which was mighty wide of her, to use an expression from my youth. (I thought that's what it was, at any rate, never seeing it in writing and thinking it was wide as in wide- or broad-minded. Actually it was white! As soon as I realized that, I stopped saying it. I swear!) Trice, however, uses it with abandon, defiantly, in Zorn's blog (twice!), accusing me and Steinberg of lacking the courage to do so.
Never mind. The key point made by Trice is that she's not the one former Chi Trib managing editor Dick Ciccone wrote about in his Royko: a Life in Print. It was someone else, says Trice. So Ciccone missed the time she tried to get a column killed! It's all clear now. Dawn T. Trice has been wronged and has my deepest apologies!
And Ciccone will be stunned to hear it. He did a book in which he recalled in detail, down to his stopping presses and making the paper come out late so as to restore the column killed by an editor whom he names, demonstrating attention to detail. He was there. He restored it. But he misses the one about Dawn T. Trice. There were two such cases, and he got only one! Maybe there were three or four others, and he missed them! There goes Ciccone, hanging his head in shame.
In any case, Trice admits, yea, boasts, that she tried to get a Royko column killed to protect readers' imagined sensibilities -- but no reader complained, Ciccone noted. The pigmy went for the giant and almost pulled it off.
[Zorn replied, quoting my above "deepest apologies," said my apology is "grudging," which seems a willful misreading of an ironical comment. It's not an apology at all, of course; and the need to point it out is not something one expects to encounter in urbane intercourse. In a debate with sophomore, yes. Or a sophist. Or a brat.]
STORY DEMANDS CONFLICT: Chi Trib today has p-1 story, left column, by Neikirk about a runaway special-interest-oriented tax package on its way to passing, condemned by t-tanks of left and right.
Sun-Times has Wolinsky story about Motorola losing a top exec, apparently because of bad performance under relatively new CEO.
Trib's is very long, S-T's pithy, which right off makes the latter more a newspaper story. Still, that's also broadsheet vs. tabloid style, and Neikirk's story gives play to notion that taxation can hurt business, and you can't blame a guy for trying, with his quoting of Brookings and American Enterprise institutes in same story.
But apart from the Trib story's length, something nagged me about it. As a reader I could not get excited, because of the what-else-is-new element. Lobbyists get what they want, and picnics get rained on, so?
But reading Wolinsky, on the business page, I got analysts' comment on the departure of the exec. They saw it as man leaving because he did poorly and the new CEO said get out of here. Then I got a claim of being "floored" by the very idea from Motorola's #2 man, and in length readable over coffee. Now there I was with at least a bit of conflict.
But there was none in Neikirk's story of 1100 words, just everybody saying what a bad thing this is, unless you count the downstate Illinois Republican seeking small-business tax relief. But no contact with the bad guys, legislative leaders approving the padding or lobbyists. No attempt to reach them is mentioned.
So no conflict, and the reader has an essay before him, or even a column, not a news story. And Neikirk sounds committed to the side he reports, whereas Wolinsky, following the rules, does not tip his hand. This is very important to the reader, who finds 1100 words of no-conflict boring compared to 550 of clear conflict and would rather not be preached to.
Sun-Times has Wolinsky story about Motorola losing a top exec, apparently because of bad performance under relatively new CEO.
Trib's is very long, S-T's pithy, which right off makes the latter more a newspaper story. Still, that's also broadsheet vs. tabloid style, and Neikirk's story gives play to notion that taxation can hurt business, and you can't blame a guy for trying, with his quoting of Brookings and American Enterprise institutes in same story.
But apart from the Trib story's length, something nagged me about it. As a reader I could not get excited, because of the what-else-is-new element. Lobbyists get what they want, and picnics get rained on, so?
But reading Wolinsky, on the business page, I got analysts' comment on the departure of the exec. They saw it as man leaving because he did poorly and the new CEO said get out of here. Then I got a claim of being "floored" by the very idea from Motorola's #2 man, and in length readable over coffee. Now there I was with at least a bit of conflict.
But there was none in Neikirk's story of 1100 words, just everybody saying what a bad thing this is, unless you count the downstate Illinois Republican seeking small-business tax relief. But no contact with the bad guys, legislative leaders approving the padding or lobbyists. No attempt to reach them is mentioned.
So no conflict, and the reader has an essay before him, or even a column, not a news story. And Neikirk sounds committed to the side he reports, whereas Wolinsky, following the rules, does not tip his hand. This is very important to the reader, who finds 1100 words of no-conflict boring compared to 550 of clear conflict and would rather not be preached to.
7/19/2004
The dog ate Chi Trib's homework. The computer did it to yesterday's paper, the publisher explains today.
"The source of the problem has been identified," never mind by whom. This is Modern Times in the Charley Chaplin mode. They (editorial, monarchic "we") "sincerely apologize . . . and are committed to improving safeguards. . . . We thank you . .. for your commitment" to Chi Trib.
That's really nice, especially the sincerely part.
Meanwhile, the story is covered, and not impersonally, by newsgatherer professionals, and computer expert James Coates puts it in technological perspective in "A story we never thought we'd print," which is a good way to put it and with the news story shows us how good journalistic writing differs from the corporate variety. Coates even mentions people in the first sentence:
"[A] computer system failure caused by a software coding error (italics added) significantly delayed production and delivery of Monday's print edition,"the publisher tells readers. This is standard blame-taking. Nothing personal, you know.
"The source of the problem has been identified," never mind by whom. This is Modern Times in the Charley Chaplin mode. They (editorial, monarchic "we") "sincerely apologize . . . and are committed to improving safeguards. . . . We thank you . .. for your commitment" to Chi Trib.
That's really nice, especially the sincerely part.
Meanwhile, the story is covered, and not impersonally, by newsgatherer professionals, and computer expert James Coates puts it in technological perspective in "A story we never thought we'd print," which is a good way to put it and with the news story shows us how good journalistic writing differs from the corporate variety. Coates even mentions people in the first sentence:
"Nothing built by humans can go wrong in as many ways or with as nasty an outcome as a computer system."In fact, his whole account is a tale of derring-do, including hour-by-hour retelling. Maybe it will enter the lore.
Chi Trib has page one story 7/19 about Iraq rebels gaining force, expanding power, citing (regretfully, to be sure) a U.S. colonel a year ago talking about Saddam's henchmen's last gasp. Gotcha!
This is part of the drumbeat of negativism appearing not in its editorials but in its so-called news coverage.
Meanwhile, you can easily find reports from the ground on the web that tell you we are winning. Who's right? I have my opinion, but so what? Point is, why is Chi Trib so consarned one-sided in its so-called news reporting? It's getting ridiculous. Really.
This is part of the drumbeat of negativism appearing not in its editorials but in its so-called news coverage.
Meanwhile, you can easily find reports from the ground on the web that tell you we are winning. Who's right? I have my opinion, but so what? Point is, why is Chi Trib so consarned one-sided in its so-called news reporting? It's getting ridiculous. Really.
GRAZIE . .. Sun-Times columnist Neil Steinberg recommends Chicago Newspapers today, with special attn. to the 5/15 "As the Trib turned" item. He calls it a "keel-hauling of the . . . painfully shallow and criminally dull Dawn Turner Trice" and refers to "the funhouse mirror of Trice's mind" that led her to get things so confused. Read it all here.
7/18/2004
STYLE MAKES THE WOMAN
Chi Trib's huge "special report" 7/18/04 is about "one girl's struggle to find a future." It opens this way:
Rayola Victoria Carwell sits quietly on a wooden bench in the principal's office and folds her arms across her stomach to calm the whirling butterflies.
Now. What would Strunk & White say? Elements of Style, you know. Omit needless words (Rule 13) and all that. Try this:
Rayola Victoria Carwell sits on a bench in the principal's office and folds her arms across her stomach to calm the butterflies.
Gone are quietly, wooden, and whirling, which clutter the copy. Ms. Banchero might feel put upon at the excisions, but the copy editor should do it anyhow, because purple is for king's garments and sunsets, not for prose.
Equally cluttered is paragraph 2:
She straightens the leg of her favorite jeans, the ones with the embroidered purple daisies, the ones she creased to perfection at 6 this morning. She grabs a braid cascading from the ponytail atop her head and slips it into her mouth.
Which should be:
She straightens her freshly creased jeans and reaches for a braid from her ponytail and slips it into her mouth.
Enough already of purple daisies and 6 in the morning and cascading things. The 'graph is overloaded. We are newspaper readers in a hurry, for one thing. Banchero is introducing us to 4,400 words, for God's sake. Our coffee is getting cold.
She may have a story here, but it's off to a soppy start. And it's a three-parter. Oh boy.
Chi Trib's huge "special report" 7/18/04 is about "one girl's struggle to find a future." It opens this way:
Rayola Victoria Carwell sits quietly on a wooden bench in the principal's office and folds her arms across her stomach to calm the whirling butterflies.
Now. What would Strunk & White say? Elements of Style, you know. Omit needless words (Rule 13) and all that. Try this:
Rayola Victoria Carwell sits on a bench in the principal's office and folds her arms across her stomach to calm the butterflies.
Gone are quietly, wooden, and whirling, which clutter the copy. Ms. Banchero might feel put upon at the excisions, but the copy editor should do it anyhow, because purple is for king's garments and sunsets, not for prose.
Equally cluttered is paragraph 2:
She straightens the leg of her favorite jeans, the ones with the embroidered purple daisies, the ones she creased to perfection at 6 this morning. She grabs a braid cascading from the ponytail atop her head and slips it into her mouth.
Which should be:
She straightens her freshly creased jeans and reaches for a braid from her ponytail and slips it into her mouth.
Enough already of purple daisies and 6 in the morning and cascading things. The 'graph is overloaded. We are newspaper readers in a hurry, for one thing. Banchero is introducing us to 4,400 words, for God's sake. Our coffee is getting cold.
She may have a story here, but it's off to a soppy start. And it's a three-parter. Oh boy.
6/30/2004
Re: M. Moore's technicolor op-ed showing in your neighborhood theater. The Scandinavian Spectator Blog: Stambord runs "The Lies of Fahrenheit," by Michael Moynihan in Stockholm, who picks this out of the movie of the week. It's Condoleeza Rice making this claim:
"Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.”
"Pretty damning stuff, isn’t it?" asks Moynihan. "But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version. Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:
“Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It’s not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York.”
In other words, Moore doctored the quote to make Rice claim what the administration never denies it claimed. Naughty, but people eat it up. And P.T. Barnum would be pleased as punch.
"Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.”
"Pretty damning stuff, isn’t it?" asks Moynihan. "But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version. Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:
“Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It’s not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York.”
In other words, Moore doctored the quote to make Rice claim what the administration never denies it claimed. Naughty, but people eat it up. And P.T. Barnum would be pleased as punch.
6/28/2004
Just came off a failed experiment in flying Republican ideas past 100 or so newsies in an E-mail grouping. Advice: don't do it. A) They are not interested. B) Some of them object strenuously to the ideas themselves - it's not what they are used to hearing and their minds are made up.
So on to the wild world of the blog, as I told another member of the group, where sensitivities are not so finely attuned to the tried and true even if false. Charge!
So on to the wild world of the blog, as I told another member of the group, where sensitivities are not so finely attuned to the tried and true even if false. Charge!
6/07/2004
Dennis Byrne (registration required) compares the pro-late-term-abortion judge to Joseph Mengele, the Nazi boy from Brazil. It's worth reading.
Ex-Chicagoan Roger Simon fell in love with a wonderful column in 1980 and has nourished the flame ever since. Read this on Ronald Reagan.
5/16/2004
SUNDAY HEADLINES . . . Sun-Times has huge p-1 pic and headline for city schools' worst principal, as voted by her teachers. Most unpopular, they mean. Anyhow, why the huge head and pic? It's like the suburban superintendent they featured some months back who had made a bundle and a half. Really. Tabloid headlines are supposed to grab you, but with what? These represent an expense of credibility in a waste of ink, to adapt Shakespeare.
Then (as ever) there's Chi Trib, with its "Prison leaders had past woes" story about Abu Ghraib. This is a surprise? And what about pursuing the s.o.b. Zarkawi, the bin Laden buddy who beheaded Berg on camera. How about something on him and how he got so twisted? Without giving his gripes about U.S. so much space he comes out looking justified? Not likely in this case, beheading and all. But come on, Tribsters, he's not Sunday-headline material?
Then (as ever) there's Chi Trib, with its "Prison leaders had past woes" story about Abu Ghraib. This is a surprise? And what about pursuing the s.o.b. Zarkawi, the bin Laden buddy who beheaded Berg on camera. How about something on him and how he got so twisted? Without giving his gripes about U.S. so much space he comes out looking justified? Not likely in this case, beheading and all. But come on, Tribsters, he's not Sunday-headline material?
5/15/2004
AS THE TRIB TURNED . . . There are times when Chi Trib seems populated by graduates of politically correct campuses, editors and reporters who speak mostly to their own kind. Take Dawn Turner Trice, who as a fledgling "about 14 years ago," per her 5/3/04 column, almost got a Mike Royko column killed by complaining about his use of the N-word. "Just starting out" at the Trib while working "one Sunday evening," she "decided to read an electronic version" of the Royko column set to run the next day. "The column contained the N-word," she wrote. Royko had used it before, "often," she said, "mostly in quotes to disparage racists."
Mostly? She knows where he used it except to disparage racists? Or is she just writing sloppily?
"The tragedy," however, "was that even he couldn't understand fully how painful and demeaning it was to see it in print," wrote Turner Trice, who "honestly [did not] recall the exact point of Royko's column." Neither could she remember the name of the "white woman" editor who was not offended by the word because of its context and even after some "back and forth" between them did not kill the column.
A DIFFERENT TWIST . . . But Turner Trice apparently forgot elements of that story and maybe never knew yet others or never read F. Richard Ciccone's Mike Royko: A Life in Print (Public Affairs, 2001), in which he recounts apparently the same incident. Or she read it and forgot that too. Or Ciccone, veteran reporter and political editor and Trib managing editor, got it wrong. The odds, however, would not be with Turner Trice if she chose to enter the journalism-expertise ring with Ciccone.
The word was "monkeys," as used by cops in Los Angeles in conversation with a police dispatcher in 1991, according to a transcript which Royko obtained. "Were they monkeys?" one cop asked the dispatcher, meaning African Americans. Told they were not African Americans, he regretted the lost opportunity for some "monkey-slapping."
Royko finished the column at 6:30 Sunday night and went home, Ciccone writes. About eight o'clock "a young African American editor" discovered the column and "became incensed" over it. "She rounded up several colleagues and urged them to read it. All . . . were young; some were minorities." They complained to Carl Sotir, the news editor on duty, who agreed with them. The column was "offensive."
Sotir called Ciccone, the managing editor, who was not at home. Then he called the deputy managing editor, Howard Tyner, who ordered the column killed – the first to be killed in Royko's seven years at the Trib. Royko blew up. "I am resigning from that fucking newspaper," he told Ciccone when he reached him at home at 10:30. "Those fucking assholes killed my column. I quit."
Ciccone called the paper, listened to the column read by an assistant news editor, and said, "Put it back in the paper." This meant keeping trucks and drivers waiting, late arrivals at commuter stations, and putting a crimp in the day's sales, but presses were stopped and the column was restored. Ciccone called and told Royko, who said he quit anyway. But next day he came in as usual.
AFTERMATH . . . The column ran, and of 600,000 Trib readers none complained. The only complainers had been those staffers alerted apparently by Turner Trice, whom Ciccone does not name. The cause became celebre. Wash Post's media writer Howard Kurtz wrote it up. So did Editor & Publisher. Royko blamed "naive young staffers more interested in political correctness than good journalism" (Ciccone's words), not Tyner, who hadn't read the whole column. Which seems overly generous to Tyner: it's like the driver whose view of traffic was blocked but went ahead anyway.
It also seems overly generous of Trib managers to have given a column (years later) to a minor talent such as Turner Trice -- unable to get facts straight but willing to call up the incident, as her column lead, no less, to bolster her case against politically incorrect language. In which column she, neither sadder nor wiser, can vaguely, fecklessly recall her own inverted touch with greatness as an object lesson.
Mostly? She knows where he used it except to disparage racists? Or is she just writing sloppily?
"The tragedy," however, "was that even he couldn't understand fully how painful and demeaning it was to see it in print," wrote Turner Trice, who "honestly [did not] recall the exact point of Royko's column." Neither could she remember the name of the "white woman" editor who was not offended by the word because of its context and even after some "back and forth" between them did not kill the column.
A DIFFERENT TWIST . . . But Turner Trice apparently forgot elements of that story and maybe never knew yet others or never read F. Richard Ciccone's Mike Royko: A Life in Print (Public Affairs, 2001), in which he recounts apparently the same incident. Or she read it and forgot that too. Or Ciccone, veteran reporter and political editor and Trib managing editor, got it wrong. The odds, however, would not be with Turner Trice if she chose to enter the journalism-expertise ring with Ciccone.
The word was "monkeys," as used by cops in Los Angeles in conversation with a police dispatcher in 1991, according to a transcript which Royko obtained. "Were they monkeys?" one cop asked the dispatcher, meaning African Americans. Told they were not African Americans, he regretted the lost opportunity for some "monkey-slapping."
Royko finished the column at 6:30 Sunday night and went home, Ciccone writes. About eight o'clock "a young African American editor" discovered the column and "became incensed" over it. "She rounded up several colleagues and urged them to read it. All . . . were young; some were minorities." They complained to Carl Sotir, the news editor on duty, who agreed with them. The column was "offensive."
Sotir called Ciccone, the managing editor, who was not at home. Then he called the deputy managing editor, Howard Tyner, who ordered the column killed – the first to be killed in Royko's seven years at the Trib. Royko blew up. "I am resigning from that fucking newspaper," he told Ciccone when he reached him at home at 10:30. "Those fucking assholes killed my column. I quit."
Ciccone called the paper, listened to the column read by an assistant news editor, and said, "Put it back in the paper." This meant keeping trucks and drivers waiting, late arrivals at commuter stations, and putting a crimp in the day's sales, but presses were stopped and the column was restored. Ciccone called and told Royko, who said he quit anyway. But next day he came in as usual.
AFTERMATH . . . The column ran, and of 600,000 Trib readers none complained. The only complainers had been those staffers alerted apparently by Turner Trice, whom Ciccone does not name. The cause became celebre. Wash Post's media writer Howard Kurtz wrote it up. So did Editor & Publisher. Royko blamed "naive young staffers more interested in political correctness than good journalism" (Ciccone's words), not Tyner, who hadn't read the whole column. Which seems overly generous to Tyner: it's like the driver whose view of traffic was blocked but went ahead anyway.
It also seems overly generous of Trib managers to have given a column (years later) to a minor talent such as Turner Trice -- unable to get facts straight but willing to call up the incident, as her column lead, no less, to bolster her case against politically incorrect language. In which column she, neither sadder nor wiser, can vaguely, fecklessly recall her own inverted touch with greatness as an object lesson.
4/22/2004
Chi Trib is a crafty creature. Items are searchable outside its archives for one week and no more, which may not be unusual. But there's no advice to look in archives if you can't find what you're looking for, boo-hoo. So I missed the John Kass column of one week ago 4/15, "America needs Bush to lead, not Oprah," , which archives has for you at $2.95. UNLESS you get at it via the Kass page under "recent columns." So yes, Chi Trib did have comment on Madame Gorelick and Chi readers were not as deprived as I said.
Eric Zorn in today's Chi Trib -- on the trial of racist-and-proud-of-it Matthe Hale -- is as measured and readable statement of constitutional rectitude as we are likely to find in a daily noosepaper.
And in Chi Sun-Times Monday 4/19, irregular columnist and onetime TV reporter Mary Laney blows whistle on Clinton aide Jamie Gorelick as member of 9/11 commission. [Not linkable] Fox in chicken coop is this Gorelick, who herself tied investigative hands in 1996 with a memo, adopted as Unholy Writ by AG Janet Reno, that prevented FBI from searching computer of suspected Al Quaeda terrorist Z. Moussaoui. Gorelick gives new meaning to chutzpah by (a) serving on the commission when she should be one of those testifying and (b) grilling C. Rice et al.
No one at Chi Trib commented on this, though its web site has a thorough airing of the matter in an AP story. The reliable Robert Novak reported on it in three lead paragraphs to his 4/18 news-item column in S-T. Otherwise, Chicago readers have been out in the cold in this more than ordinarily crucial matter.
And in Chi Sun-Times Monday 4/19, irregular columnist and onetime TV reporter Mary Laney blows whistle on Clinton aide Jamie Gorelick as member of 9/11 commission. [Not linkable] Fox in chicken coop is this Gorelick, who herself tied investigative hands in 1996 with a memo, adopted as Unholy Writ by AG Janet Reno, that prevented FBI from searching computer of suspected Al Quaeda terrorist Z. Moussaoui. Gorelick gives new meaning to chutzpah by (a) serving on the commission when she should be one of those testifying and (b) grilling C. Rice et al.
No one at Chi Trib commented on this, though its web site has a thorough airing of the matter in an AP story. The reliable Robert Novak reported on it in three lead paragraphs to his 4/18 news-item column in S-T. Otherwise, Chicago readers have been out in the cold in this more than ordinarily crucial matter.
4/20/2004
BOOK TIME! . . . The books they are a comin' out. Now comes Woodward with fixation story. Cheney "fixated" on Iraq, says S-T head 4/17. Look for more of that in the next few days, until it peaks. It's more proof that Clever Sigmund, that investigator of upper-class Jewish women's minds (whatever did they want?) in pre-WW1 Vienna, did one big thing if nothing else: He gave a new, sophisticated passive-aggressive ways to say "Your father's mustache" or "Up yours" or "asshole." Thanks to him, we can easily avoid something like "firm intent" to do this or that (vs. fixation on same) or "longstanding conviction" and instead chalk it up to something really crazy.
COMPARED TO WHAT PRESIDENT? . . . An interesting question is, were Bushies more fixated on Iraq (and is it news that Wolfowitz et al. were for radical solution of the world's Middle East problem?) than FDR was on Nazi Germany and the Axis (of evil) of his day? To the exclusion of worrying about Stalinist Russkies, for instance? Get lost, FD heatedly told normally trusted advisor-with-access Adolf Berle when B. came to him with W. Chambers's damning and credible accusations of Alger Hiss as Commie agent -- which he was, we know now, thanks to Venona papers, not to mention what came out of two trials as excellently anatomized by Allen Weinstein in Perjury: the Hiss-Chambers Case (Knopf, 1978). There he went again, FDR and his fixations.
Bottom line regarding new books a'comin': This be partisan politics, folks. Libs at it again, big time. Fixated.
LET THE PRESSES ROLL . . . As for mainstream newsies, hey, the latest Woodward book is a peg wherewith to keep ball rolling, from here not to eternity but to the 1st Tuesday in November.
GW deceived us, they say. FDR didn't? New book coming out comparing the two as to deception quotient? Not that we know of, though Right Wing Conspiracy Publishers might find it a good idea.
As for deception, what about supposed newsie Woodward sitting on all those good quotes while helping to put out a daily newspaper, his Wash Post? I'm trying to imagine how daily paper editors I knew would have liked that.
COMPARED TO WHAT PRESIDENT? . . . An interesting question is, were Bushies more fixated on Iraq (and is it news that Wolfowitz et al. were for radical solution of the world's Middle East problem?) than FDR was on Nazi Germany and the Axis (of evil) of his day? To the exclusion of worrying about Stalinist Russkies, for instance? Get lost, FD heatedly told normally trusted advisor-with-access Adolf Berle when B. came to him with W. Chambers's damning and credible accusations of Alger Hiss as Commie agent -- which he was, we know now, thanks to Venona papers, not to mention what came out of two trials as excellently anatomized by Allen Weinstein in Perjury: the Hiss-Chambers Case (Knopf, 1978). There he went again, FDR and his fixations.
Bottom line regarding new books a'comin': This be partisan politics, folks. Libs at it again, big time. Fixated.
LET THE PRESSES ROLL . . . As for mainstream newsies, hey, the latest Woodward book is a peg wherewith to keep ball rolling, from here not to eternity but to the 1st Tuesday in November.
GW deceived us, they say. FDR didn't? New book coming out comparing the two as to deception quotient? Not that we know of, though Right Wing Conspiracy Publishers might find it a good idea.
As for deception, what about supposed newsie Woodward sitting on all those good quotes while helping to put out a daily newspaper, his Wash Post? I'm trying to imagine how daily paper editors I knew would have liked that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)