Lazy Journalism

Here we go again. No sooner had President Bush commuted the sentence of Scooter Libby than the media launched into its usual, knee-jerk attempt to analyze the response to the decision in terms of right vs left.

Airwaves and news pages were quickly filled with talk of "outrage from the left," "criticism from the left," and how the commutation "will further drive the left crazy."

It's positively Pavlovian. Ring the issue bell, and reporters start to drool about right vs left. Even when the facts show that the Libby commutation -- like the war in Iraq, like the war on drugs, like global warming -- is not an issue that splits along right/left lines.

In a SurveyUSA poll taken immediately after the commutation was announced, 60 percent of those surveyed said they disagreed with the decision, including 35 percent of conservatives. And, in an earlier Time magazine/SRBI poll, 72 percent said they would disapprove of a pardon. So unless "the left" has recently had an incredible growth spurt, a lot of people on the so-called "right" are feeling outraged too.

Is it really that hard for the media to address this issue without the left/right crutch? Or, if journalists and pundits insist on hobbling along using that musty terminology, can they at least do a little research and see that there are plenty on "the right" who aren't exchanging high-fives over Libby dodging the prison bullet?

Can someone please alert the media: not every issue fits your cherished right/left paradigm. Indeed, that way of looking at the world is becoming less and less relevant -- and more and more absurd.

Its even worse when the media claims balance by presenting two extremists (one liberal and one conservative).

That's like claiming balance when standing with one foot in a bucket of boiling water and the other foot in a bucket of ice.

Vittermania, Part 2

There is more about the Vitter affair. I had been reading about Vitter's diaper fetish and now the AP is reporting it. There are two points to be made beside the obvious hypocrisy.

One is that he called the prostitute from the halls of Congress, on government time.

The other is that he characterized it as a sin and went on to say he had asked for and received forgiveness from his wife and God (wonder how he knows God forgave him) - thereby putting an end to it. I'm less concerned about his sins than his crimes and he also committed a crime.

I think there is more on the diaper fetish. Do you want to know?

Get your mug in Marigny Perks

Check out the stylish new mugs for sale. There are two designs of these Faubourg Marigny commemorative mugs and each is $8.00.

I want to encourage everyone to go to the web site (www.marignyperks.com) and look at the page, "Coffee Talk". Its a forum page and we need participation to get it going. Take a look and jump in.

Vittermania

Stories about David Vitter fly around the Internet - maybe there's some truth in them. I just looked at his website and there is nothing on it about his current troubles. I read that a former Democratic governor is on the prostitute's call list. Well, at least we know it wasn't Edwards. He's safely tucked away.

Vitter's troubles are our troubles. The same is true of Congressman Jefferson. We need strong leadership in Congress to help secure our fair federal aid for Katrina recovery. These two lost their influence and effectiveness in representing our interests. Did you know that New York after 9-11 and Florida after hurricane Andrew were both forgiven the 10% local match requirement to get FEMA funds. Louisiana has been refused forgiveness of the 10% match requirement. A community reeling from a natural disaster is in no position to come up with up front matching funds. We need strong and influential representation in Washington and these guys don't help. If we still had John Breaux and Robert Livingston we would be in a better position.

Tomorrow: How the media weakens our country.

Starbucks looses

A reader points out that Starbucks could re-open one of the two stores they abandoned on Mag. St. after Katrina.

I can think of only one at the moment but that one is interesting. It sits on the corner of Magazine and Nashville, across the street from a locally owned coffee shop. I met with the owner of the local shop and she told me it was a struggle to compete with Starbucks, but she held on. Now Starbucks is gone and the local shop is still open.

Starbucks in the French Quarter

Last Friday there was an article in the paper about Starbucks in the quarter. I'll do a little copy and paste below:


"Starbucks Coffee Co. has withdrawn its lease application for a premiere retail site at the corner of St. Ann and Chartres streets on historic Jackson Square.


La Madeleine French Bakery and Restaurant, which operated at the site for 23 years, did not reopen after Hurricane Katrina because it failed to get a concession on its lease payments. Several other retailers in what is known as the Lower Pontalba building were granted such concessions by the Louisiana State Museum, which owns the building, because they were struggling to cope with the post-storm slowdown in tourism. In May, news that Starbucks was seeking the former La Madeleine location prompted support from local merchants who believed the coffee giant would attract foot traffic. But still other local business owners said the chain would be out of place in the historic atmosphere. This week the museum issued a brief statement saying that Starbucks withdrew its lease application and that the only other applicant, local chef Scott Boswell, was still being considered. Boswell, owner of the Stella! and Stanley restaurants, wants to put a restaurant in the location"



What do you think? Would you want Starbucks in the quarter?

The comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought

Our myths are formed by beliefs we hold that have no basis in fact. Its our myths that allows us to have the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. Thus we accept new information that may be irrational or false as long as it fits our mythology. We reject clear facts and logic if they conflict with our myths. Its how we elect idiots to high public office and how we fall in love. We are irrational beings in an irrational world.


Our myths are also formed by irrational thinking. I hear people extrapolate to the whole from their own narrow experience and the result is an illogical conclusion. When you hear someone reach a conclusion because "everyone I know is.........." or " I don't know anybody who is........." you are hearing illogical thinking. People will accept anecdotal evidence as if it were statistical evidence. An anecdote proves only that instance but when the anecdote is a compelling story it can lead to an unshakable and illogical conclusion. We are irrational beings in an irrational world.

It is possible to think rigorously and critically but if we substitute myth for thought we provide the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.