Yonivore
10-06-2008, 09:06 PM
Four years ago, mainstream media peddled their bias with Dan Rather’s famous phrase, “fake but accurate.” This year we are treated to its corollary: False but justified.
Sebastian Mallaby (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/05/AR2008100501253.html) couples the following two points in his Washington Post column:
1. The Obama campaign is falsely blaming the financial mess on McCain-style deregulation.
2. It is “mostly justified” that Obama reap the benefit.
It is justified because the author says Obama is “more thoughtful on the economy.” That’s it.
Being more thoughtful does not mean being right, but being right is apparently not as important as being thoughtful. It comforts liberals to envision people thinking hard about difficult questions, even when they come up with the wrong answer. Consequences be damned.
Really, I’m not making this up. Here’s the money paragraph from Mallaby:
The financial turmoil has pushed the Obama campaign into the lead, and this is mostly justified. Barack Obama is more thoughtful on the economy than his opponent, and his bench of advisers is superior. But there’s a troubling side to the Democratic advance. The claim that the financial crisis reflects Bush-McCain deregulation is not only nonsense. It is the sort of nonsense that could matter.
Have no fear; Obama is thinking. His superior advisers who give the wrong answers are better than a cadre of mediocre advisers pushing wise policy.
So blaming deregulation for the financial mess is misguided. But it is dangerous, too, because one of the big challenges for the next president will be to defend markets against the inevitable backlash that follows this crisis.
False, dangerous, misguided . . . and justified. Liberalism in a nutshell.
Sebastian Mallaby (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/05/AR2008100501253.html) couples the following two points in his Washington Post column:
1. The Obama campaign is falsely blaming the financial mess on McCain-style deregulation.
2. It is “mostly justified” that Obama reap the benefit.
It is justified because the author says Obama is “more thoughtful on the economy.” That’s it.
Being more thoughtful does not mean being right, but being right is apparently not as important as being thoughtful. It comforts liberals to envision people thinking hard about difficult questions, even when they come up with the wrong answer. Consequences be damned.
Really, I’m not making this up. Here’s the money paragraph from Mallaby:
The financial turmoil has pushed the Obama campaign into the lead, and this is mostly justified. Barack Obama is more thoughtful on the economy than his opponent, and his bench of advisers is superior. But there’s a troubling side to the Democratic advance. The claim that the financial crisis reflects Bush-McCain deregulation is not only nonsense. It is the sort of nonsense that could matter.
Have no fear; Obama is thinking. His superior advisers who give the wrong answers are better than a cadre of mediocre advisers pushing wise policy.
So blaming deregulation for the financial mess is misguided. But it is dangerous, too, because one of the big challenges for the next president will be to defend markets against the inevitable backlash that follows this crisis.
False, dangerous, misguided . . . and justified. Liberalism in a nutshell.