Categories
Catholicism Morality

A thoughtful Catholic

Gary Wills interviewed in The Atlantic several years ago:

You make the case for the importance of “loyal opposition” to official church positions that are nonsensical, unethical, or backward. “The job of a loyal Catholic,” you write, “is to give a support that is not uncritical, or unreasoning or abject, but one that is clear-eyed and yet loving.” What does that imply for a lay Catholic? Is simply continuing to attend mass and remaining part of the community while quietly disagreeing with and disobeying certain objectionable dicta (like the ban on contraception) enough?

That’s what it did imply until recently. Most of us Catholics have an experience of the faith at the parish level that’s very comfortable. We’re generally happy with our fellow believers and our priests and the lay assistants (who are very important these days in parishes). But now we find out that our children are being abused and that the hierarchy has protected this crime. So it’s not enough anymore to say, “Well, we’ll just ignore the Pope on issues like sex about which he’s totally ridiculous.” We have to intervene and protest and become active. And that’s what’s happening.

(h/t Andrew Sullivan.)

Categories
Election 2008 Obama Politics The Clintons

Quote of the Day

Maureen Dowd in The New York Times:

On “Nightline” last week, Hillary once more wallowed in gender inequities, asserting that it’s harder for her to run than her opponent — a black man with an exotic name that most Americans hadn’t even heard a year ago.

“Every so often I just wish that it were a little more of an even playing field,” she said, “but, you know, I play on whatever field is out there.”

Is that how she would deal with dictators, by playing the refs and going before the U.N. to demand: “How come you’re not asking Ahmadinejad these questions first?”

Categories
Domestic issues

Too many exceptions to the rule

From Elizabeth Weil of the Times.

One reason for this, Giedd says, is that when it comes to education, gender is a pretty crude tool for sorting minds. Giedd puts the research on brain differences in perspective by using the analogy of height. “On both the brain imaging and the psychological testing, the biggest differences we see between boys and girls are about one standard deviation. Height differences between boys and girls are two standard deviations.” Giedd suggests a thought experiment: Imagine trying to assign a population of students to the boys’ and girls’ locker rooms based solely on height. As boys tend to be taller than girls, one would assign the tallest 50 percent of the students to the boys’ locker room and the shortest 50 percent of the students to the girls’ locker room. What would happen? While you’d end up with a better-than-random sort, the results would be abysmal, with unacceptably large percentages of students in the wrong place. Giedd suggests the same is true when educators use gender alone to assign educational experiences for kids. Yes, you’ll get more students who favor cooperative learning in the girls’ room, and more students who enjoy competitive learning in the boys’, but you won’t do very well. Says Giedd, “There are just too many exceptions to the rule.”

I think Jay Giedd, quoted above, summarizes the reasons so many policies don’t work.  “Too many exceptions to the rule.”

Categories
Election 2008 Obama Politics

Gray’s Papaya for Obama!!

[digg-reddit-me]Ms. Clinton lost the endorsement battle for the famous New York chain “home of the $3.50 ‘Recession Special’ (two franks and a 14-ounce drink)”, Gray’s Papaya.

The prominent chain instead endorsed Mr. Obama with large signs on all of its prominent stores in Manhattan. Mr. Gray, who is 71, tried to downplay the significance of his endorsement: “I am often wrong, unfortunately. I think I’m going to be right this time, though.”

I used to pass a Gray’s Papaya on the way to work every day – but upon switching jobs, I no longer do.

So now, we add to the unlikely endorsements Mr. Obama has managed to garner – the Teamsters, Louis Farrakhan, David Duke, Bill Clinton in 2004, every newspaper in the country except the New York Times – and Gray’s Papaya.

Categories
Criticism Politics

How to Spin the Press

I’ve been thinking about how the media works, and how to push the press to cover a particular side of the story because at work, I’ve been dealing with this. (Which is one story in this whole slew of stories.) Here are my thoughts based on my experience as a student reporter, as a political candidate who relied on the media to some extent (again in college), and on my experience in the middle of the two waves of coverage in the previously mentioned story (first a few months ago with the noose, and now with the plagiarism charges).

Reflections

What has passed for objective journalism in recent history consists almost entirely of “he said, she said” recitations of competing allegations.

Headline: John Kerry Denies He is a Traitor
“He said John Kerry is a traitor.”
“She said he’s not a traitor.” ((This Washington Post article from September 2004 doesn’t delve into the issue much more than this above summary – except second to last sentence which says, “some of the independent organization’s assertions were refuted.”))

Anyone reading this is left uncertain as to whether or not John Kerry is in fact a traitor. This is a typical problem in much media coverage – and one which extremists and media spinners of every political stripe have learned to exploit. Glenn Greenwald described precisely how this style is actually an abdication of the responsibility of a journalist in this post this past November:

When a government official or candidate makes a factually false statement, the role of the reporter is not merely to pass it on, nor is it simply to note that “some” dispute the false statement. The role of the reporter is to state the actual facts, which means stating clearly when someone lies or otherwise makes a false statement.

As more academics and senior journalists echo Mr. Greenwald’s point – and given the reality of being misled in the run-up to the Iraq war and during the 2004 election, many reporters to become more resistant to the simple “he said, she said” school of journalism. But they still try to maintain their facade of objectivity, which they associate with avoiding making overt judgments about what they are covering, while also telegraphing what their judgments to their readers. A prime example of this can be seen in the coverage of former Senator John Edwards. To telegraph their private belief that Mr. Edwards was a phony, many reporters included such sentences as “John Edwards, who recently made news for his $400 haircut, continued to talk about his poverty initiatives.” ((It is certainly astounding to look at how many times the $400 haircut came up in coverage of Mr. Edwards’ campaign.))

Especially given these realities about reporting, “spinning” the media coverage becomes essential for any subject of reportage. Spinning can be defined as an attempt to get journalists to insert implied judgments and premises favorable to a particular side into their reporting.

Effective spin is a dialogue; it takes this into account each reporter’s preconceptions (and as most of the press operates as a herd, this isn’t as hard as it could be) and excuses these preconceptions while pushing the story in a friendly direction. This involves creating storylines that engulf the previous stories: taking all the other angles into account, explaining them, and setting the reporters in a different direction. The last thing any reporter wants to hear is that they are wrong or biased – rather they must be told that they only were able to get to half of the story by their deadline. When the other half of the story unfolds, the reporter is able both to save face and move the narrative in a favorable direction. This is successful spin.

Categories
Foreign Policy Humor

Geldof and Bush

Irish rocker Bob Geldof has written a reflective piece on the time he spent with Mr. Bush in Africa this past week.

[Mr. Bush] is also, I feel, an emotional man. But sometimes he’s a sentimentalist, and that’s different. He is in love with America. Not the idea of America, but rather an inchoate notion of a space — a glorious metaphysical entity. But it is clear that since its mendacious beginnings, this war has thrown up a series of abuses that disgrace the U.S.’s central proposition. In the need to find morally neutralizing euphemisms to describe torture and abuse, the language itself became tortured and abused. Rendition, waterboarding, Guantánamo, Abu Ghraib — all are codes for what America is not. America has mortally compromised its own essential values of civil liberty while imposing its own idea of freedom on others who may not want it. The Bush regime has been divisive — but not in Africa. I read it has been incompetent — but not in Africa. It has created bitterness — but not here in Africa. Here, his administration has saved millions of lives.

Categories
Election 2008 Obama Politics The Clintons

The New York Times Endorsement

I made a big deal of the New York Times endorsement at the time.  I thought they endorsed Ms. Clinton to hedge their bets – and that the endorsement was rather weak.  Some disagreed.

But The New Republic is reporting that the Times almost didn’t endorse Ms. Clinton:

On January 25, the New York Times endorsed Senator Hillary Clinton. At the time, the 1,100-word editorial stood out for both its tepidness and early appearance, coming near the front-end of the primary season.

The rest of the article is here.

Categories
Domestic issues Politics

Public groundswells

Adam Nossiter of the New York Times profiled Republican and reformer Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal.  Mr. Jindal is being promoted as a future Republican star.  So far, he seems like the real deal. Mr. Jindal decided to start his reforms by taking on the most prominent aspect of the corruption: lavish meals for state politicians.

The governor, ignoring cries of pain and going against the unswerving devotion to Louisiana’s food culture, pushed for the $50-a-meal cap, at any restaurant. No more unlimited spending.

In a town where legislators have been known to proclaim paid-for meals a principal draw to public service, this was an especially unpopular move. Last week, State Representative Charmaine L. Marchand of the Lower Ninth Ward in New Orleans said the limit would force her and her colleagues to dine at Taco Bell, and urged that it be pushed to $75 per person, to give them “wiggle room.”

No public groundswell took up her cause, and the $50 limit held.

(Incidentally, the dry humor the last line demonstrates made the article for me.)

Categories
Election 2008 Politics The Clintons

A short history of “Whoops!”

Eleanor Clift of Newsweek:

The much vaunted Clinton campaign operation, billed as the biggest, baddest game in town, had no post-Super Tuesday strategy because its leaders apparently didn’t think one was needed. Whether that’s due to arrogance or ignorance, it’s the campaign equivalent of what President Bush did in invading Iraq without a post-Saddam plan. The primaries are in a very true sense a practice run for the White House, and if you emerge with high marks, as Obama has, it’s a pretty clear statement of the kind of government you would run. Obama has shown a steadiness in demeanor and message. Clinton has blown through $120 million dollars, and her persona is more confused than ever.

There was an article in The Onion from 2004 that I have been looking for, but am unable to find. The headline read: “Bush Reelection Campaign Better Planned Than Iraq War.”

You can’t extrapolate from a good campaign means that a candidate will govern well; but if you cannot run a good campaign – and you’ve never proved you can run anything – I think how the campaign is run becomes a major issue.

Categories
Life Prose

These doomy, gloomy, over-psychologized, terminally ironic, post-humanist, post-postmodern times

But this love business – so far, it had been not very satisfying.  He had been involved with girls he liked; he had been involved with girls he didn’t like. In neither case had he ever really felt…whatever it was that he imagined he was supposed to feel.  He was shy, so that even though he showed determination at work, and playing hockey he positively enjoyed giving an opponent a hard check, he shrank before a girl who attracted him, and this made the search for someone who would make him feel whatever it was he was supposed to feel particularly difficult.  Moreover, he wasn’t cold-blooded, so he couldn’t pursue and abandon girls with the same relish as some of his friends, his best friend in particular, rather, he had a sympathetic streak that, in the matter of making conquests, seemed much more like a weakness than a strength.

From pages 5 to 6 of Beginner’s Greek by James Collins.   I just started reading the book a few days ago.  James Kaplan of The New York Times described the novel as:

…a deeply strange book. In fact, it is, to the best of my knowledge, a nonesuch: a 400-plus-page first novel by a 49-year-old American male, dedicated to the highly dubious proposition that such a thing as perfect romantic love is possible in these doomy, gloomy, over-psychologized, terminally ironic, post-humanist, post-postmodern times. Part comedy of manners, part chick lit in male drag, James Collins’s “Beginner’s Greek” is a great big sunny lemon chiffon pie of a novel, set, for good measure and our sociological titillation, among the WASP ruling classes, people who work at white-shoe investment firms and own villas in southwestern France and can instantly tell the difference between fine Bordeaux and plonk.

There is also apparently already a fight over the movie rights – with Anne Hathaway and Harvey Weinstein involved.

I will say now that the novel wears better than Mr. Kaplan’s wearying review of it.