Media Notes Archive   |   Live Q&As   |   RSS Feeds RSS   |  E-mail Kurtz  |  Style Section
Page 4 of 4   <      

Belated Dissenters

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

"It breaks my heart to think the Democrats might be stupid enough to nominate Hillary. But then again, it doesn't really surprise me. . . .

"Those Democratic true believers who consider Hillary a viable national candidate should ask themselves a simple question: Do you really think America is ready to elect a woman president?

"Perhaps I should re-phrase that. Do you really think a country of gun- and Jesus-loving red staters will, in a time of war, elect the skirt-wearing lesser half of the most despised political couple in American history? A McGovern-Dukakis ticket would have a better shot, and given how much the DNC loves a tired old re-tread candidate -- witness the name John Kerry still being bandied about -- don't think for a second those guys have been ruled out.

"Hillary is the most polarizing political figure of our time -- and that's just among Democrats. I live on the west side of Los Angeles, and we're about as blue state as you can get. My friends are all tree-hugging Prius drivers whose idea of a sexy candidate is Dennis Kucinich. To us, the Upper West Side of Manhattan has gotten just a little too reactionary.

"Even so, only about half my friends say they'd vote for Hillary. Sure, those who love her, love her. But most of us just see a disingenuous, win-at-all costs, me-first, power-hungry flip-flopper. She's Bill without the warmth, charm, charisma or common touch. He even got the good hair. And if Hillary is this divisive among loyal Democrats, just think how she'll play in all those Midwest states where the only guy they hate more than Charles Darwin is Bill Clinton."

Nothing like surveying your friends to get a handle on the political situation.

Is blogging going mega-mainstream? Wired reports (via Public Eye) that "a syndication service that delivers commentary from 600 bloggers for use by newspaper publishers is set to launch on Tuesday, further blurring the lines that divide blogs and mainstream media."

" "BlogBurst , as the service from blog technology company Pluck Corp. is known, includes headlines and articles for use by newspaper publishers in the news or feature sections of their online services, as well as print editions. Pluck initially has signed up Gannett Co., Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, Austin American-Statesman and San Antonio Express."

Is the NYT gaga over Gossip-gate? The New York Sun thinks so:

"It's easy to see why the Daily News is throwing everything it's got into the story of the scandal at Page Six of the New York Post. But what are New Yorkers to make of the New York Times? The Gray Lady fronted the topic for two days running and twice devoted a full broadsheet page of coverage inside the paper to the drama between billionaire Ronald Burkle and reporter Jared Paul Stern. By our count, at least 13 individual reporters have been named as contributing to the Times's coverage. By Monday the Times had run more than 10,000 words about Page Six.

"Over the same period, so far as we can tell, the Times ran just two sentences about the genocide in Darfur, a passing reference in the Times's own gossip column. The Times ran but 4,000 words on the Israel election in a four-day period during which the vote took place. The German election last fall rated similar coverage, about 4,000 words over four days. While the Times had 13 reporters chasing a two-day-a-week freelancer for the Post it missed the news reported in Monday's New York Sun by our Josh Gerstein that a California judge had dismissed Senator Clinton from a lawsuit that had been brought against President Clinton relating to campaign fundraising improprieties. The Times has yet to acknowledge the scandal over the anti-Israel paper coauthored by the academic dean of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.

"So how to explain the Times's obsession with the Post? Are the machinations of the New York Post's gossip column twice as important as the Israeli or German election? Is it schadenfreude, or payback for the Post's coverage of the Times's own recent troubles?"

Three words: Nothing but readers.


<             4


© 2006 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive