The Partisan War on…Well, Everyone Follow-Up
I think that not one reasonably honest person can disagree with Jason when he criticizes both liberal and conservative bloggers, activists, pundits and politicians for creating yet another highly partisan environment, which bodes ill for America’s political future and the future of the political debate.
I’m a self-admitted Obama critic, but there is a difference between being a critic, and being a partisan, ideological hack. Basically, the latter believe or pretend (trust me, many of those you think are honest about it, thinking that the world will come to an end, etc. are lying through their teeth or, as some would like me to say, ’spinning’ tremendously, mostly out of both partisan reasons and ambition) that the world will come to an end if ‘the other side’ wins presidential elections. They are utterly incapable of admitting that the other ’side’ may be right every once in a while, and they believe (or say) that ‘the other side’ consists out of evil individuals.
This divide in the U.S. is something I noticed years ago, and rather than the gap decreasing, I think it’s increasing. Since I’m not American I’m not particularly concerned with whether or not this is healthy for the United States (it’s not), but I am concerned about the health of the political debate (which I am a part of, obviously). It’s destroying the debate, drowning all reasonable voices and generally creating an environment in which no sane person who wishes to be happy can function.
So, I’ve decided to do something no one else seems to do these days, or at least not on a regular basis: I’ll publish articles positive about Obama. I’ll do so every day, until election day. One day it will be about a specific news event, the other about his character, and again on another day about a specific policy proposal he put forth.
And if this will cost us readers who rather have me publish articles critical of Obama, I have only one thing to say: I couldn’t care less. Integrity is more important than hits.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
