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.



Friday, July 02, 2004
The loony left: I was going to refrain from beating up on Michael Moore for awhile just because it seemed like piling on. After all, sites like www.moorelies.com, www.bowlingfortruth.com and www.moorewatch.com, are doing a pretty good job of ensuring that the Oscar-winning filmmaker's propaganda doesn't go unchallenged.

But then I read today's "column" by my favorite New York Times columnist, Paul Krugman.

It should come as no surprise that Krugman and Moore are in one accord when it comes to how they feel about President Bush. But we are treated to yet another demonstration of how far out on the loony left Krugman has ventured.


[S]ince it opened, "Fahrenheit 9/11" has been a hit in both blue and red America, even at theaters close to military bases. Last Saturday, Dale Earnhardt Jr. took his Nascar crew to see it. The film's appeal to working-class Americans, who are the true victims of George Bush's policies, should give pause to its critics, especially the nervous liberals rushing to disassociate themselves from Michael Moore.

There has been much tut-tutting by pundits who complain that the movie, though it has yet to be caught in any major factual errors, uses association and innuendo to create false impressions. [emphasis added]


After reading this, we are presented with two options: First, Paul Krugman has willfully ignored many of the articles that can be found exposing factual error after factual error. Krugman would undoubtedly hide behind the modifier "major." (It's curious how Krugman has decided to give Moore a pass when time after time he has impugned the motives of the Bush administration when far less outrageous mistakes were made.)

The second option is that Krugman doesn't know what facts are.

I firmly believe that Krugman could follow each of those links I've provided which detail serious problems with the accuracy and honesty of Moore's account and remain confident that there are no "major factual errors." Krugman has developed this ability over the past few years as he has refused to make many necessary corrections to his columns.

I am very anxious to see how Sen. John F. Kerry's campaign responds to Moore's propaganda piece. The sane and responsible thing would be to dismiss it -- but that could anger Kerry's base and encourage them to waste their votes on Ralph Nader.

The ranks of the loony left continue to grow and it's hurting this nation.

Democracy in America can best be served when we have two parties with competing ideas. When one of them implodes it hurts us all. With no honest and intelligent criticism from the left, the national dialogue turns into a monologue -- and that's not good for the country.

1:30 AM

Comments: Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger Pro™