Monday, February 20, 2006

Yo, Clancy

There's something I've been meaning to ask you about. Between your weekly column in the state's largest alternative weekly, your editorship of the same paper and your frequent TV appearances, you're one of the most influential opinion makers in metro N.O., if not the entire state. So why do you so often seem to put about as much thought (forget research) into your opinions as a bar room pontificator or know-it-all neighbor? Or state your opinion on a debatable issue as if it were received wisdom?

Case in point, I saw you on TV6 news giving your opinions on Blanco and Nagin at some point during the last week of October, right before your paper resumed publication. You said that Blanco's decision not to federalize the response or the National Guard was unquestionably (you might have said "hands down") a terrible mistake,etc. Well Clancy, that floored me. I like to think of myself as reasonably well informed and up on current debates, but apparently I wasn't in that case. I thought that was still a subject of some debate. "But," I thought, "if Clancy says that debate's been settled, I guess it's been settled. Anyway, I'm sure he'll explain it further when Gambit resumes publication." Well as far as I know, that's still a subject of some debate, and, as far as I know, you still haven't backed up that statement. Since those decisions involved human lives opinions about them shouldn't be stated as fact.

Actually, considering that her growing reputation for weakness and incompetence is perhaps her biggest obstacle to effectively governing, you should be able to back up all such criticisms. I'm most certainly not saying that you shouldn't criticize her at all. I've only found myself defending someone that I'd otherwise be very critical of because of criticisms like that one or the failed to ask for the right type of help the right way canard.

Now you seem to give Ron Forman sole credit for the zoo's turnaround. You're a couple of years older than me, and I have vague memories of the "zoo is for you/ parks are for people" fight. Surely you knew that no one person was responsible, and don't give me that "well that's the perception, and perception is reality" crap. A little research showed that it wasn't the case. Although in this case the research did actually involve going to the library, since so little was available on line. I'm not saying that Forman doesn't have some impressive credentials, he does. But this is too important an election to make anyone out to be Annie Sullivan to the city's Helen Keller.

Well, I suppose that it is your paper and you can write what you want to. But if you're just going to give opinions as fact, you might want consider blogging. Actually, bloggers at least do internet searches. Sometimes we even go the library.

schmack down on the old media.

Boy, bayoust.john fella, you are handy with that blogger. Nail the press all in one day. Clancy and the T/P,whew!

Who's next the Holy Rosary Bulletin?
Nobody's planned. I planned a similar post about DuBos after I first saw him give the received wisdom on federalizing the guard back around Halloween. His Ron the savior pice just brought it back to mind.

On the T/P, I admit they were great for about a week and a half, but then they must have gotten flak about being so critical of the administration. Took them about a month and half to find their spines again and they still seem to have a line they won't cross. Mainly it's the old he said/she said journalism thing I keep harping on.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Old Favorites
  • Political Boxing (untitled)
  • Did Bush Take His Ball and Go Home
  • Teratogens and Plan B
  • Foghorn Leghorn Republicans
  • Quote of the Day
  • October's News(Dec.1)
  • untitled, Nov.19 (offshore revenue)
  • Remember Upton Sinclair
  • Oct. Liar of thr month
  • Jindal's True Colors
  • No bid contracts