HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
By Brooks A. Mick, M.D.
Mar. 28, 2006 Politicians and political pundits have frequently been known to attempt to mislead. It has become fashionable to call this "spinning." (Minor digression--some folks around here appear to be trying to rewrite history regarding Ken Hughes' views. I'll just let the critical reader read for himself and make up his own mind. My opinion is that Uncle Ken merely tried to call a spade a spad--but one always knew he meant a short, D-handled, flat-nosed shovel.) Some people are reliable guides. These reliable guides are correct so consistently that they can be considered "gospel" such as Charles Krauthammer or Victor Davis Hanson--or they are wrong so consistently that one can simply choose the opposite position to be nearly certain of being right. These include Nicholas Kristof and Ellen Goodman. Other people are simply not reliable, being wrong or right in rather random fashion. These people are usually called "moderates." Then there are the people who are blatant spinners, simply trying to make things look good for one political side or the other. Bob Beckel and Paul Begala comes to mind. But it is becoming more difficult to spin--or fabricate or lie--about anything, as the internet is a miraculous tool for digging up the original data about anything. To give Al Gore credit, it is "the information highway." One has to be careful, however, for it is also the "misinformation highway." (That's my original term, by the way.) So what's up now? Not long ago, Francis Fukuyama, one of the original neo-con gurus, declared that not only was the intervention in Iraq a failure and wrong, but that he always knew it was from the beginning. He also declared that others had been exhibiting irrational exuberance, to coin a term, about the Iraq War and its chances for success. It's hard out here for a limp--argument. It gets harder to mislead ever day. The internet has made is so much easier to dig up the facts. Liberals who took glee in Francis Fukuyama's about face, having turned against the Iraq war. From my viewpoint, Mr. Fukuyama appeared to be engaging in the rewriting of history, his own history, by claiming that he was always doubtful about the war. It turns out that he was misrepresenting others' viewpoints, also, and because his characterization of their points of view contrast so decisively with what was actually said and written at the time, one can easily reach the conclusion that either Mr. Fukuyama is fabricating or that he is a victim of false memory syndrome. Mr. Krauthammer clearly exposes parts of Fukuyama's latest book as erroneous fabrications of things Krauthammer supposedly said--but didn't! Mr. Fukuyama has thus joined the legions of those who are not reliable enough to bother reading. http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/charleskrauthammer/2006/03/28/191505.html ------------ About the author Brooks A. Mick: Physician, still practicing medicine but retired from the US Army. Write just for the fun of it, but working on novel in the vein of Tom Clancy's politico-military genre. Email: brooks15@cox.net Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
