WALL STREET JOURNAL
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE
THE WEEKLY STANDARD
DRUDGE REPORT
THE WASHINGTON POST
SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE
NEW YORK TIMES


*=recently updated





Matthew Hoy currently works as a metro page designer at the San Diego Union-Tribune.

The opinions presented here do not represent those of the Union-Tribune and are solely those of the author.

If you have any opinions or comments, please e-mail the author at: hoystory -at- cox -dot- net.

Dec. 7, 2001
Christian Coalition Challenged
Hoystory interviews al Qaeda
Fisking Fritz
Politicizing Prescription Drugs

RSS FEED
<< current


Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More













A note on the Amazon ads: I've chosen to display current events titles in the Amazon box. Unfortunately, Amazon appears to promote a disproportionate number of angry-left books. I have no power over it at this time. Rest assured, I'm still a conservative.



Monday, September 23, 2002
A brief response: Down on my criticism of Eric Alterman, RLB (who left no e-mail, otherwise I would've responded in private) makes the following comment:


Um, let's see . . . Alterman points out Bush's status as a minority president (indisputable) who won the EC without a clear vote count (would have been true of Gore also, but he had the majority of the nation) . . . and you seem to think that Alterman's point was to accuse Bush of totalitarianism. Maybe you can fill in about fifty logical steps you have leaped over.


Read the quote of Alterman again, specifically: "They do, however, fail to note that another shared characteristic of both presidents is that neither man had been honestly elected president..."

If Alterman had said what you claimed he did, I'd have no problem with it. Remember, Clinton was a minority president too. As was Abraham Lincoln. But being a minority-elected president doesn't make you a fraud, which is what Alterman is claiming. And won the EC (electoral college) without a "clear vote count?" You want a clear vote count? Here.

Second, I didn't think that Alterman's point was to accuse Bush of totalitarianism. I merely classified Alterman as the type of idiotarian who complains that Bush is destroying our civil liberties and freedom of speech, when the fact that he can vociferously criticize Bush without getting tossed in the slammer disproves his point.

11:35 PM

Comments: Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger Pro™