I defy any of you to isolate one single insight or opinion expressed in this NYT editorial by Diane Roberts, an English Professor from U. of Alabama. It is, however, riddled with logical fallacies. The point appears to be as follows:
George W. has always been inclined to the hermetic. After all, he was molded in occult clubs of upper-middle-class white men who meet by night and engage in ceremonies they are sworn not to reveal to outsiders.Someone send Roberts a definition of Circumstantial Ad Hominem.
Oh, and add a definition of Hasty Generalization, for the dubious swipe against my alma mater:
When George W. was admitted to Yale (clearly a university committed to diversity even in academic achievement), DKE was happy to pledge him.When you could run an editorial with the quality of Libertyblog's (for) or Newsrack's (against) on the exact same topics under the inept scrutiny of Roberts (and Lewis) in the Times today, why would you? Because the NYT Editorial pages run a lot of puff pieces to please those who wish to pretend they are informed by ridiculing "conservatives" (more accurately, non-statists). In some part, it's Talk Magazine for the chattering classes, or perhaps the elitist hyper-snob sports section. Posted by Mindles H. Dreck at December 1, 2001 01:15 PM | Technorati inbound links