Week in Review
I did something different this week. All of my stuff has been serious analysis, but this week I tried for some humor by rewriting an WSJ.com opinion piece to try to show how ridiculous its logic is. That day, I got over 70 hits, the most of the week, so I will try it again.
I got five comments this week:
Steve wrote in reference to the DMN maligning protesters:
I spout Christian and Family Values while stuffing my pockets and screwing whoever gets in my way, therefore I am a Republican.
I don't see what your comment has to do with my post, but I will try to post something soon that your comment is totally apropriate for.
soopadoopa wrote in reference to my criticism of the WSJ.com article defending Ann Coulter:
The transformation by the right-wing punditocracy of Ann Coulter from "conservative writer" to "political satirist" is the only way that the right can bolster the reputation of this erstwhile right-wing media darling, after her book "Slander" was thoroughly debunked and exposed as a collection of bitter rants and made-up "facts".
Just read "Blinded by the Right" to learn how the right will bend over backwards to prop up the reptutations of its disgraced media hit-men.
It still just stuns mean that somebody would try to defend Ann Coulter by saying that she isn't serious when she says those outlandish things. I have not seen her say anything to temper or provide a humorous context to any of her statements.
My analysis on Al Gore ganered two comments. The first was by debgill:
This analysis is dead on. If only the "reporters" had taken the time and effort to check up on Shrub. Instead, they were impressed that he gave them donuts, so nothing else mattered.
I wish I had an explaination for why the media was so biased, but that bias is a huge threat to our democracy
Then soopadoopa wrote:
Great analysis. I would argue that there's a fourth "M", as in "Monica". Gore was forever tainted with Clinton's scandals, both real (the "Monica" scandal) and GOP-concocted (Buddhist Temple-gate, Filegate, Travelgate, Fostergate, Chinagate, Whitewater, etc.) This contributed to both his own failure to make effective use of the Big Dog during the campaign, and the media's visceral dislike for the guy.
Whenever I tried to follow that, I always came back to media. The only real Clinton scandal was highly personal and didn't involve Gore in any way. The rest are, as you said, "GOP-concocted" and the only reason they had any life was the assistance of the naitional media.
Steve wrote in reference to my praising a NYT editorial on Dubya's new tax cuts:
The very wealthy are fine people and deserve all the money. They keep their shoes nicely shined. I'm sure they have other fine qualities, but the shiny shoes do it for me. How can one argue with shiny shoes? One can try, but one will lose--to the shoes(shiny).
Shiny shoes. So that is the secret of the rich people's hold on the Republican party.
In terms of readership, I got 330 hits this week and overall, I am 29th on the Salon blog list with 1,647 page reads.
9:32:59 AM 
|
