pot v. kettle

In another move that shows that Howlin’ Leroy Eenk is ahead of the curve on hot button political issues, Editor and Publisher, a publication that covers the print news media, moved a story Wednesday that ponders the ethics of an AP story last week cataloguing instances of a certain invalid arguments President Bush employs to pistol-whip opponents.

Conservative blowhards compared it to a DNC talking points memo. Liberal blowhards praised it. Apparently that is enough of a news hook for E&P.

To be glib and a hypocrite, the E&P story poses the question: is it possible to objectively point out a politician’s overuse of invalid arguments?

By the tone of the article, I would guess: yes, if it’s a hypothetical politician, and no if it’s President Bush.

The E&P article steers clear of discussing the facts of Jennifer Loven’s story. It also says that identifying a logical fallacy is apparently a subjective deduction, as though the straw man fallacy was new, or it was a theory, like evolution and the Big Bang, just theories.

Instead E&P zeroes in on the fact that Loven did not quote any Republican or Bush supporters saying, with a straight face, “Everybody does it.” Nor does she explain to what lengths she went to in order to include presidential apologists in the story.

For E&P’s share, it doesn’t mention that Loven avoided saying the straw man is a fallacy, an invalid argument. She referred to it as a “rhetorical device.”

Loven’s story was not perfect, there are scarcely few of those. It could have made more mention of the fact that politicians of all stripes have used the straw man when advertising their abilities for elected office (plus yours truly).

However, there has been only one stripe in power for years now. I’m more interested in what’s happening today.

E&P also quotes Republican critics as saying Loven’s personal politics are probably left of Bush’s, which feeds into the old conservative dogma that the “media” has a “liberal bias,” a critique of Loven that is reasonably close to “attacking the man,” another fallacy.

Could it be that Loven is just a hack, an estranged reporter who has been using her power, unconsciously or otherwise, to further her ideological agenda? Maybe. Sure. Why not. But nobody is disputing the facts: Bush said these things, and more, and it doesn’t cost a person the time it takes to microwave a burrito (three minutes) to notice that his logic doesn’t compute. I mean, love him or hate, you have to admit, you can’t always take what Bush says at face value.

E&P must really believe that partisan loyalty determines if a leap in logic is valid or not.

Or else they might be treading dangerously close to enabling a “hit piece” against some one who presents facts that call the Bush Administration onto the carpet.

(The only blog E&P cites having posted on the issue was Monday by the Washington Post, a full two days after the story was first noticed by Howlin’ Leroy Eenk intern Delores Hazen and submitted to Rev. Eenk for his review. The Post got beat by Howlin' Leroy Eenk, and kept beating them for two whole days! Please stop by the editor’s office for a free Howlin’ Leroy Eenk water bottle, Delores.)

Props go to Richie Blade of Phoenix for the tip on the E&P story.