Cool kid punditry
posted by Liberal Eagle at 11:30 AM
I guess I really thought it'd be different now. I guess I really thought people were over the idea that politics is all about who you'd want at your barbecue (if you're a voter) or cocktail party (if you're an insider pundit).
Sigh. Andrew Sullivan, on the Chris Matthews Show, talking about Sen. Clinton:
For the pundits at the top, it actually makes very little difference what those positions are; he only mentions in passing that he "finds her positions appealing," and doesn't seem to think it's important even to elaborate. No, see, the important criterion in selecting a president is not whether she will govern in a way you feel will be good for the country. It's whether or not she's icky and has cooties.
Sadly, this is how we got stuck with Bush in the first place. Remember 2000? When for two years, the central theme of the media coverage was what a great aw-shucks regular guy George W. Bush was (this was even more frustrating because, to me at least, it was transparently not true) and what a big stinky pootyhead wussy nerd Al Gore was. It was like policy didn't exist. For every news item that actually examined how these two people would govern differently, which would seem like pretty much the only really relevant fact in an election for high office, there were ten that were written like we weren't holding an election so much as rating the Hollywood super-hunks.
Al Gore? He's that icky nerd. George Bush? Oh, he's dreeeeeeeeamy. Hillary Clinton? Ewwww, she has coootieeeeeeeees.
What? You say policy actually matters to the hundreds of millions of people who will be governed by whoever's elected, that (as the last six years have shown) it's often literally a matter of life and death for some of them?
Booooooooriiiiiiiiiiiiing.
To say our elite pundits are like children is an insult to children, who are sometimes very sensible people. It's more like they're the biggest wankers in the known universe. Ha ha ha ha ha ha. That's a technical term.
Sigh. Andrew Sullivan, on the Chris Matthews Show, talking about Sen. Clinton:
SULLIVAN: I think she’s been a very sensible senator. I think—find it hard to disagree with her on the war. But when I see her again, all me—all the cootie-vibes resurrect themselves. I’m sorry—
PANEL: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
HOWARD FINEMAN: That’s a technical term!
SULLIVAN: I must represent a lot of people. I actually find her positions appealing in many ways. I just can’t stand her.
For the pundits at the top, it actually makes very little difference what those positions are; he only mentions in passing that he "finds her positions appealing," and doesn't seem to think it's important even to elaborate. No, see, the important criterion in selecting a president is not whether she will govern in a way you feel will be good for the country. It's whether or not she's icky and has cooties.
Sadly, this is how we got stuck with Bush in the first place. Remember 2000? When for two years, the central theme of the media coverage was what a great aw-shucks regular guy George W. Bush was (this was even more frustrating because, to me at least, it was transparently not true) and what a big stinky pootyhead wussy nerd Al Gore was. It was like policy didn't exist. For every news item that actually examined how these two people would govern differently, which would seem like pretty much the only really relevant fact in an election for high office, there were ten that were written like we weren't holding an election so much as rating the Hollywood super-hunks.
Al Gore? He's that icky nerd. George Bush? Oh, he's dreeeeeeeeamy. Hillary Clinton? Ewwww, she has coootieeeeeeeees.
What? You say policy actually matters to the hundreds of millions of people who will be governed by whoever's elected, that (as the last six years have shown) it's often literally a matter of life and death for some of them?
Booooooooriiiiiiiiiiiiing.
To say our elite pundits are like children is an insult to children, who are sometimes very sensible people. It's more like they're the biggest wankers in the known universe. Ha ha ha ha ha ha. That's a technical term.
<< Home