Monday, October 26, 2009

Since you asked

What questions do you ask if you don't want to ask the obvious questions?

'Fox News has had a robust 2009 so far, and the recent decision by the White House to declare war on the channel is not likely to put a dent in the ratings. That decision has dispirited some of the President’s well-wishers. It has also puzzled them. In American politics, it should be considered a good thing when, after you have won a Presidential election by more than nine million votes, your chief critics accuse you of filling your Administration with Nazis, Maoists, anarchists, and Marxist revolutionaries. That is the voice of the fringe, and the fringe is exactly where you want the opposition to set up permanent shop.'

Lets leave aside the Nazis and Anarchists- I watch Fox News and I've never heard an accusation from anyone on there that Obama was hiring either- and concentrate on the Maoists and Marxists. To me, the obvious question to be asked when Fox accuse someone employed in the White House of being a Maoist or Marxist is, well, is it true? Is there credible evidence, like for instance, the person declaring themself to be a Maoist on video, that the claim is true? And if it is true, what does that say about the people in charge of the White House?

But when you are congenitally unable to ask the obvious questions, you have to resort to the much less valid ones-

'...wars of words are distracting, and Obama campaigned as a listener [tee hee]—a contrast with his supremely deaf predecessor that was evidently welcomed by the electorate. Why are his spokespersons throwing red meat to Fox’s angry white men? Wouldn’t it be better to supply them with only tofu smoothies?'

Well, yes. Why are they doing that? Could it be that the even-handed, highly intelligent metrosexual super-educated non-partisan uniter of the campaign trail was... a hoax? Could it be that Obama is really a closed-minded ideologue who becomes extremely tetchy when his ideological holy cows are trampled on or disdained? Could it be that the great listener wants us all to 'shut up and quit talking'? Could it be that the great proponent of bipartisanship is actually a partisan hack who holds the opposition in high contempt?

Yes, it not only could be, it is.

No comments: