SIGN IN to access Harper’s Magazine
1. Sign in to Customer Care using your account number or postal address.
2. Select Email/Password Information.
3. Enter your new information and click on Save My Changes.
Subscribers can find additional help here. Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!
Karl Rove thinks that a president who would pick as his running mate a former small-town mayor and state governor with little experience would be making “an intensely political choice” and demonstrating that he was not “first and foremost concerned with, ‘Is this person capable of being president of the United States?’” Or at least that would have been the case had Barack Obama selected Tim Kaine, the governor or Virginia and the former mayor of Richmond, which Rove derided (“with all due respect”) as only about the 150th biggest city in America.
Of course, soon thereafter Rove praised McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin. She’s more than qualified to be the VP, he said, seeing as she’s not only been a state governor but is also the “former mayor of the second-largest city in Alaska.”
The Daily Show also catches a few other wonderful moments of hackery, like Bill O’Reilly on the pregnancy of Bristol Palin (“a personal matter” on which judgment should be withheld) vs. Bill O’Reilly on the pregnancy of Jamie Spears (“the blame falls primarily on the parents”).
Meanwhile, Peggy Noonan publicly praises Palin but is caught on an open mic saying, “The most qualified? No! I think they went for this–excuse me–political bullshit about narratives.”
That’s the problem with using political hacks (from either side) as cable-news analysts and op-ed writers. It’s not so much that that they’ve wrong or misinformed, but that their opinions are worthless because they’ll say anything to advance their side’s agenda.
More from Ken Silverstein:
Perspective — October 23, 2013, 8:00 am
How pro-oil Louisiana politicians have shaped American environmental policy
Postcard — October 16, 2013, 8:00 am
A trip to one of the properties at issue in Louisiana’s oil-pollution lawsuits
I recently spent a semester teaching writing at an elite liberal-arts college. At strategic points around the campus, in shades of yellow and green, banners displayed the following pair of texts. The first was attributed to the college’s founder, which dates it to the 1920s. The second was extracted from the latest version of the institution’s mission statement:
The paramount obligation of a college is to develop in its students the ability to think clearly and independently, and the ability to live confidently, courageously, and hopefully.
Let us take a moment to compare these texts. The first thing to observe about the older one is that it is a sentence. It expresses an idea by placing concepts in relation to one another within the kind of structure that we call a syntax. It is, moreover, highly wrought: a parallel structure underscored by repetition, five adverbs balanced two against three.
Percentage of Britons who cannot name the city that provides the setting for the musical Chicago:
An Australian entrepreneur was selling oysters raised in tanks laced with Viagra.
A naked man believed to be under the influence of LSD rammed his pickup truck into two police cars.
Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!
“Shelby is waiting for something. He himself does not know what it is. When it comes he will either go back into the world from which he came, or sink out of sight in the morass of alcoholism or despair that has engulfed other vagrants.”