Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Okay, I have a lot to do today,

and I'm feeling kind of prickly because, thanks to The New York Times, I have to come over here and make a short list of crap that I don't think I should have to take from some chick who is half the writer I am.

So, without further ado:

A Short List of Crap that I Don't Think I Should Have to Take from Kate Zernicke (Who Is Half the Writer I Am):

This hit piece about the Kerry-Feingold-Boxer amendment.

Okay, I know it's not a popular position to take, but, you guys: WE'RE AT WAR. And just because we never get to see any of it, doesn't mean there isn't blood and coffins and a GIANT UNWINNABLE MESS - and that much, at least is sinking in. A majority of Americans now appear to want to leave Iraq.

So what does John Kerry do? He works with other members of his party - popular, capable, principled members like Russ Feingold and Barbara Boxer - to present legislation that's never going to pass, but will at least provide an alternative point of view to the administration's "Stay the Bloody Hopeless Course Till We Get That Oil" Serenade. WHAT A BASTARD.

Last week, I started a PAC to help curtail the efforts of one John Kerry from putting country before party and generally trying to make the world a better place. The Times might have joined up, but, no, people are dying. Better to trivialize that fact as publicly as possible, right?

The Times has always been snarky on the subject of John Kerry, so I'm not going to deconstruct Kate Zernicke's lousy reporting and give it the skewering it deserves. I will just remind the average voter - particularly, the average Democratic voter - that we really ought to step back from the poison and anger and plain old gossip-mongering that fuels pieces like the one in question every now and again, and try to look at them with some perspective. If John Kerry stops the war in Iraq - which he won't - this year, yes, it will have a political impact. Yes, he will look better than a lot of '08 candidates. Because he's principled.

Suggesting John Kerry should abandon his principles on Iraq is wrongheaded. Acting as if John Kerry gaining political capital is THE WORST THING IN THE WORLD is just as wrongheaded. Progressive politics aren't supposed to be about what stands our leaders should be allowed to take, when it's their "turn," but what kind of leadership Americans require and deserve.


At 4:36 PM, Anonymous Sparrow said...

Here's my letter to the NYT

I was amazed to see the sloppiness and shabby sourcing that your newspaper is now becoming known for. I'm referring specifically to the article by Patrick Healy and Kate Zernike.

Considering a few weeks ago your paper stooped to the level of who slept with whom by Patrick Healy, just like the comments overheard in a high-school locker room. Followed by Kate's little queen bee-like article that is nothing more than snide whispering into one person's ear and spewing lies to the next person, except instead of limiting her idle gossip to her personal conversations, she's misused her position at the NYT's to spread gossip and smear to the masses.

When did your organization become so efficient at school clique journalism instead standing up against any corruption in government. Is this the quality journalism that makes the New York Times proud?

Please issue Kate her last paycheck and send the queen bee on her way. Perhaps, Karl Rove would hire her overtly as his press secretary instead of the NYT's having that dishonor.

At 4:52 PM, Blogger Democrafty said...


Nice letter, Sparrow! Thanks for stopping by, and thanks to DCP for all the interest in this matter. A lot of people have just really had it with high-school journalism at the NYT.


Post a Comment

<< Home