The big Debate

I semi watched it. Hillary’s looking at the crowd above was distracting and made her look like she was snubbing the audience and Obama. Obama’s dancing last night was not as smooth as in the past.
Both of their answers on the constitutional right to bear arms made me cringe.
(yes folks, we have the constitutional right, however, the right can be adjusted in your local community. huh?)

I think David Brooks has a good roundup. With a solid complaint about politicians who make blanket pledges. “No new taxes”, “We’re getting out of Iraq”

Why can’t anyone say – “That’s 10 months away. We’ll see. This would be my policy right now based on xyz.”
Brooks gives Clinton a B and Obama a D+. I don’t think Obama supporters will see it that way.
(Ed Morrissey has a good roundup too)

Which brings us to this hilarious story that starts out explaining how Obama supporters will see him as having won and Clinton supporters will see her as having won.

Why/How is that?
Well, according to studies (and he, Mr. Kristof, names 3 which could easily be found) people basically look at things and see the parts that support what they already believe and don’t see the rest of the information.

“Divided they fall” is the name of Mr. Kristof’s column and the first paragraphs seem to be about the divide amongst Democrats and how that may lead to Dems supporting McCain.

That’s the topic. Somehow, however, after going over the specific studies showing how people do this with their perspectives he comes up with a “raft of studies” that proves that conservatives do this more than liberals.

First off, what the heck is a “raft of studies”?

2nd – How does this column on the Democratic debate with specific studies concerning perspectives turn into a bonk on the head to conservatives for not ordering pamphlets concerning lefty ideas?
Seriously – read it. By the time you get to this paragraph – you’ll know you aren’t allowed to complain because the studies above already foretold your reaction!

This resistance to information that doesn’t mesh with our preconceived beliefs afflicts both liberals and conservatives, but a raft of studies shows that it is a particular problem with conservatives. For example, when voters receive mailings offering them free pamphlets on various political topics, liberals show some interest in getting conservative views. In contrast, conservatives seek only those pamphlets that echo their own views.

Likewise, liberal blogs overwhelmingly link to other liberal blogs or news sources. But with conservative blogs, the tendency is much more pronounced; it is almost a sealed universe.

Little did you know that your conservative brain is even more wired this way than the liberal brain. According to the liberal brain!!! ROFL!!

Seriously. How can he not see what he just did? “Liberal blogs overwhelmingly link to other liberal blog or news sources” (news sources of course be liberal) “with conservative blogs, the tendency is much more pronounced”….according to what??

In my skewed perspective I see liberal blogs not linking to much, let alone each other and conservative blogs linking all over the place.

2 thoughts on “The big Debate

  1. Thursday, I got stuck waiting for somebody at Starbucks and had to buy the NYTimes and read the Ed Page to amuse myself. I read this one “on dead tree” as NR folks say.

    It had even less credibility ON THE FREAKIN’ NYTIMES ED PAGE — all the letters were from lefties, all the editorials, all the guest columns (neither Brooks not Kristol ran that day). Pot. Kettle. Black.

Comments are closed.