If you’re like me, you’ve wondered about how outsiders interpreted the Gallaudet protests. Well, we just may have our answer now. Charlotte Allen, in her “Identity Politics Gone Wild” article for The Weekly Standard, provides a very detailed analysis of the Gallaudet protests. Much of what was said frankly makes me cringe, some appears to be blatantly false, and a few points warrant discussion. Keep in mind that Weekly Standard is read by over 60,000, which may seem like a tiny number to you but is nevertheless more than twenty times the number of people directly affected by the protests (and that’s only my own personal estimate).
Some phrases, in particular, really leapt off the screen:
militant campus radicalism
presumed martyrs
poisonous atmosphere
a culture fostered by radical students and faculty
campaign of vituperation
mixture of anger, self-pity, and clannish exclusiveness
only oppressed minority with its own hereditary aristocracy
“cultural genocide” tossed around indiscriminately
palpable and blistering antagonism
bizarre, obsolete, and self-marginalizing campus culture
For your convenience, I have attempted to summarize the author’s main points. Don’t take my interpretation at face value; I was simply taking notes. For a more thorough understanding of what Charlotte Allen was trying to say, read her article! We should take advantage of this DeafDC.com forum to dissect some of her points.
Flashback to the turmoil of 1960s… campus shutdown … near-loss of accreditation … extremely low graduation and employment rates … more choices in higher education … medical technology leads to better education … peculiar campus culture … lower enrollment rates at Gallaudet … other university presidents also forced out … through use of violence … Fernandes unanimously selected by board of trustees… aim of strike was simply to get rid of her … Davila now temporarily at helm to restore order … Fernandes not deaf enough despite numerous deaf ties … also not nice enough … scolded students for their wrongdoings … Jordan violated protocol by promoting Fernandes without faculty approval … Fernandes didn’t say hi nor smile enough … just like other administrative figures at other colleges … Fernandes, despite her outstanding qualifications on paper, still not given a chance to prove herself … Composition of protestors extended beyond campus to include alumni and even National Association of the Deaf (NAD)… Fernandes burned in effigy … Gallaudet University Faculty, Staff, Students and Alumni (FSSA) issued demands … Fernandes and Jordan ridiculed publicly by various sources … including blogs and at least a flyer … Not a single feminist organization supported Fernandes … Jordan crashed from high soar … but did his 1988 selection as President set a bad precedent of allowing students more power over trustees? …. Jordan was enormously successful at fundraising … and even compared to Martin Luther King Jr… but all of that came to a screeching halt during the protests … Jordan was now criticized for not being deaf enough either … did the Deaf community partake in a façade by pretending that Jordan was deaf enough? … radical identity politics really at hand … compared again (for the umpeeth time) with black identity and civic issues …. deaf activists play themselves out to be victims … but at the same time ask for help given to disabled … politically impermissible for deaf people to wish for hearing … Prevalent usage of ASL disputed … ASL not originally intended for educational settings, SEE was … but socializing led to dominance of ASL over SEE … Schooling once severely limited … William Stokoe proved ASL was a bona fide language … but so drastically different from English that its actual advantages for the classroom seem dubious … despite long-time use of ASL, literacy rates still at appalling low among deaf people … ASL hard to master, so other systems such as home signs or cueing used by parents and educators … ASL now proves how True Deaf one is … leading to further oppression among the oppressed … “Incestuous” part played by protestors … due to low degree of separation … Ron-Brendan Stern, Rosalyn-Jeff&Suzy Rosen named as two prime examples … NAD mentioned as well … Ridor described ASL abilities of BOT members … Brenda Brueggemann gave speech orally … she resigned along with Senator John McCain who was disturbed by his conscience … deaf diss those who can write well … Marlee Matlin and Heather Whitestone viewed as betrayers of deaf community … ‘distressingly shrill’ anti-cochlear rhetoric … even some turn against their hearing parents … for having chosen the wrong options … such as speech therapy … ASL hotly debated as ‘legitimate language for instruction’ … boo to oralism … Audism = Deaf version of racism … Total Communication = students and professors using whatever mode of communication they want … Not all deaf can master ASL … increasing number of Gallaudet students with cochlear implants … Pidgin Signed English = Compromise … Fernandes confirmed via e-mail that she believes in ‘rightful place at Gallaudet’ for all … Sim-Com = audism, oralism, disrespect for ASL … Fernandes took heat of bottled-up anger from deaf radicals … who want bilingual education despite its perhaps-prohibitive expenses and shunning of other modes used … Ryan Commerson declared Gallaudet to be Grand Audist … through FSSA, called for resignation of non-proficient ASL-users from Gallaudet board … also known for his previous tie-ups with administrative bodies over ASL-only policy … “No-voice” policy already put to unofficial use on campus which leads to positive encouragement … or intimidation … Many outside Gallaudet are turning to mainstreaming opportunities … leading to close-downs of deaf institutions … technological advances also leading to more choices … new generations not wanting to be associated with “campus culture” at Gallaudet … Gallaudet is losing deaf students … only 13 percent of eligible students bother going to Gallaudet, and Fernandes confirmed via e-mail that only 28 percent actually graduate … Fernandes given credit for expanding internship program to improve job placements … tightening academic standards, setting up an honors program and aggressively recruiting … yet numbers continue to decline… Davila making bunch of promises, but many remain skeptical about Gallaudet’s future … Slutzky, known for comparing ASL to Ebonics, thinks Gallaudet will become history … Gallaudet has turned against itself.
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
OUCH.
Well. Obviously, there’s some inaccuracies about the language aspects in the article. ASL is a true, valid language. Cued Speech and SEE are communication systems. That’s been proven by linguists. But people like her will never get that, no matter how much we scream it at her. She’s been totally turned off.
As for the comments regarding Ryan Commerson: Oh well. You had to see this coming, really. I have no sympathy for him, especially after the chaos he left behind here in Michigan.
Regarding the rest of the article… *winces*
I dunno. I’ll be honest here. I think the majority of what she wrote is pretty valid. We can be our own worst enemies, you know. And many of us did try to warn the protestors that this protest was a PR disaster, but they didn’t care. They just wanted JK out. *shrugs*
I forgot to add in my previous post - the part about incest? Ick… totally unnecessary and inappropriate. But whatever it takes to sell a magazine, I guess. :P
This woman is obviously biased against the protestors, but I still stand by my comment that the majority of what was said in the article is pretty valid. Many outsiders and hearing people out there definitely do have this view of the protest and the protestors.
Don’t be ridiculous, Deaf Pundit. No respectable scholar or intelligent person will take this Weekly Standard “article” seriously. Click on my name (above) to see the GPLI commentary.
Brian,
I would not dismiss the article so easily. If you would like to do so, that is your prejorative.
The author, while getting her facts wrong in several places as well as having a potential racist bent to some of her comments, still provided a detailed analysis. That detailed analysis is what will capture the readers’ attention and more importantly, plant a seed of doubt in a employer’s mind upon receiving a resume from a Galluadet student.
If you still would like to simply ignore the article and pretend that never happened, then perhaps the author is correct. We are witnessing the slow death of Gallaudet. And I, for one, must confess that it might not be such a bad thing.
Nonsense. The article has no legs and will be quickly forgotten.
Soon Gallaudet will be getting better publicity due to Dr. Davila’s work and the work of the Tenth President.
Gallaudet is a wonderful institution and will never close down. Deaf people are entitled to equal protection under the 14th Amendment. If taxpayer’s money is spent educating hearing students, then a proportionate amount should be spent educating deaf students in their natural language.
The bigotry in the Weekly Standard article will seem like a bizarre thing ten years from now. People will read it and it will seem like it was written by a cave man.
Sour grapes?
No, what Charlotte Allen wrote will interest many readers.
Indeed. With 84,000 published mags each week it will surely get noticed by many.
No legs? Well, just don’t blog or talk about it. Doing so will just help spread it.
And you’d be surprised how many Congressman/woman read this political conservative magazine.
And how many Congressman/woman read this political conservative magazine? Might be surprising.
McConnell,
You don’t get it, do you? Congressmen can’t make decisions based on this kind of trash. They have expert staff people who will no doubt help point them in the right direction.
I trust the common sense of the Congressional staff people. They know junk journalism when they see it, especially when something contains a blatantly racist statement that is easy to spot.
This article will be soon forgotten.
Um, the problem is not the article itself per se. It’s the perception gleaned by public outside of Gallaudet who got most of their news and information about Gallaudet and the protest through various well known and recognized media. That article re-inforces it.
Nah.
The new film “Through Deaf Eyes” is going to have a lot more influence than this biased pience of pseudo-journalism.
This will quickly pass and be forgotten. It’s a curious thing about truth. Truth has a way of coming out. These lies will not stand the test of time. They will have a shelf life of about six weeks.
Er, um, once again. It’s the perception issue rather than “truth” per se. And, certainly, a shelf-life that’s much, much longer than 6 weeks when it comes to the problem of perception.
No. Truth wins over lies. It won’t take long for the perceptions of others to become more accurate. It’s just a matter of time and having patience.
There are such things as perceptions of truth, too.
This Weekly Standard article will have no longlasting effect on the perceptions of intelligent and influential people.
take the word of a realist or a conspiracy theorist… ERRRGH! decisions decisions.. it’s like trying to decide if i should hold it in or not.
I don’t think ANY magazines have that particular long lasting effect. They come and go. I never made the claim it’ll have a lasting impact but it does put it on the front burner again ever time an article is done about the protest. And if anybody already missed the point here, it’s the continual perception of how the media is constantly describing/portraying the protest event, the people, Gallaudet University and/or the community itself. There are perceptions (plural) of truth going on here.
Jordan was pulling all the levers of influence he had available to push the bad message, when in fact the deaf community had accepted Jordan and made him a demi-god. The article skews the facts by focusing in one one statement by Angel and not putting it in context.
Truth will prevail in the long run and this will cease to be a publicity issue. If Jordan continues to try to create negative publicity of this sort, the the Board (eventually) will surely strip him of his President Emeritus honorific title and publicly rebuke him for stirring up false propaganda.
Jordan had nothing to do with the article. None. No interview from him. No email. No faxes. No Sidekick phone calls. Nada.
BR, you call what Charlotte Allen wrote trash because it has legs and will walk away? How about your many articles against Jordan and Fernandes? Almost all articles are filed.
It is very wrong to mock at the audists. One day my deaf siblings and I happened to sit next to all ASL deaf from other state in a restaurant and they mocked at me thinking I was an audist while I spoke to a waiter while my siblings signed in ASL, then when I signed in ASL as if I can’t speak one word, they ended up gawking at how fluent we signed in ASL. we did not enjoy our meals. I understand you are hearing and it is a shame that you got so much involved in a protest against both Jordan and Fernandes as if they are wicked criminals and these who are like you are perfect saints. Full of baloney!
None of that is relevant. All he had to do was encourage JK to correspond with Charlotte Allen.
He was probably the person that recommended Fernandes to the Johnetta B Cole Institute, as his name was mentioned by the Cole Institute showing contact between the Cole Institute and Jordan earlier.
Clearly, Jordan and Ferandes are continuing to wage a publicity campaign that is hurting Gallaudet and is based on false propaganda.
Susan, you are misinterpreting the GPLI commentary. It is not mocking Charlotte Allen. The phrase “has no legs” is a common phrase (not a mocking phrase). It means that her article will not influence a lot of people and will soon be forgotten. People will forget about her article because it is filled with distorted and untrue information.
Certainly they’re relevant. It means that there are other hidden agendas amongst others for the reason of the protest. Nothing more.
And secondly, what you’re stating is nothing more than a conspiracy theory that IKJ encouraged JKF to have a dialogue with the author of the article.
People don’t swallow too well when conspiracy theories are thrown left and right all over the place. Either you have the facts or you don’t. Simple as that. The rest are simply wild-eyed conjectures.
Don’t smear me, McConnell. I said “probably”–in relation to this Weekly Standard article. Now YOU, McConnell, are showing some of the same smear techniques that Charlotte Allen is using.
Jordan himself said he was proud to be JK’s mentor and he was in charge of Gallaudet PR. Of course, he has been involved in a negative publicity campaign. That’s obvious. As for the details, like what he is doing currently, we can only try to look for clues or wait until he says something about it.
Br, I do not believe I was misinterpreting your calling Charlotte Allen’s article trashy. Her article does not have legs to walk away for it will remain worthy for the readers to understand about what the protest was all about.
Most Deaf called both Jordan and Fernandes, “audists” by using the sign….twirling their index fingers on foreheads. “NOT DEAF ENOUGH!!!!!”
I asked them since Davila is also an audist and now what they call Jordan and Fernandes then. They said they were wicked.
Boy what a lousy reason for the protest and I praised Charlotte Allen’s article up to the heavens so that the public would understand what was actually going on.
BR, I understand that you tried to make the protest magnified often so that you can be rich from writing a book, huh?
Sorry, the historicians’ socks will be knocked off after reading the exact reason for the protest.
The exact reason for the protest: HATRED TOWARD THE AUDISTS!!!!!
And for the hearing protesters to feel superior among the deaf.
Who are you if not for the protest then?
Susan, you need to re-think your whole perspective. You don’t seem to have a clear picture of what the protest was all about.
Books about deaf people don’t make people rich. It’s a small market. It’s just an idea that I had to do and I might not do it. I was involved in the protest because I want to help improve Gallaudet. That’s what all the protesters want, to improve Gallaudet, and that will happen now with Davila and with the Tenth President.
BR, about the smear job, in a word…no.
If you have the facts, present them. If you don’t and you present them anyway, then they’re merely wild-eyed conjectures even if you do lob in the occasional word “probably”.
BR, do you mean that all anti protesters have no right to think the whole perspective while the protesters like you have all the right? No! Remember almost all boggers shut all anti protesters’ mouth by deleting their comments, oh yes you are one of them. This was not a right thing to do that in order to have the ugly and uncivilized protest magnified.
Since most bloggers still do that, I have to paint pictures to show more words than what all anti Jordan and Fernandes bloggers wrote. What Charlotte Allen wrote relieved many anti protesters and me greatly. I want to make sure that it pays to learn speech at all costs at Gallaudet and for the Deaf to stop signing, “twirling with their index fingers on their foreheads” insulting the audists. Shame on you for being a hearie yet is against the audists.
Let’s take it easy, gang. While this argument may be fascinating to some, the points are basically getting repeated ad nauseum. I think we should draw our attention to the actual contents of Allen’s article. For example, Deaf Pundit below just posted an array of “facts” that seem hard to dispute.
For the sake of diversity in thought, I want to see responses from people who have not yet posted to this forum. If you think that’s a good idea, then please abide by that - at least temporarily - so that others have a chance to respond. Thanks.
Julie, you are right about trying to abide by the article written by Charlotte Allen. But I want to thank you for not deleting my posts about how I feel about the protest and the wonderful audists.
Have a nice day.
Susan, I think you are confusing the term “audist” with “oralist” or some other term. There’s nothing wrong with being an oralist (or whatever else), but there are plenty of things wrong with being an audist.
To be an oralist is to choose to communicate via voice, but to be an audist is to think that deaf people aren’t as good simply because they don’t hear as well or choose to communicate via ASL.
OMG, yes, you are right that I used the wrong word audists for oralists. Thank you.
My fingers seem to be locked with typing the word “audits” during some of the conversations recently.
I have to start to proofread my comments carefully from now on. Have to cut down on reading the blogs except for DeafDC and few others in order to paint more. :)
Hey Susan…
and the fact that your fingers typed “audits” (as opposed to audiSts) obviously means you’re in the middle of doing your taxes, right?
EVIL GRIN AND WINK….;>)
to mcconnell who’s concerned about the # of congressmen who read this paper.. the ones who read and respect it are the Neo-Cons & likeminded conservatives who are never going to be on our side. the ones who read just to know what the conservatives think already know that the magazine takes an extreme right wing position on everything!
The article itself mentions that the author corresponded with Fernandes. Fernandes and Jordan are a mentor/protege team.
Nothing more need be said. There’s nothing wild-eyed about making reference to such obvious facts. It would be unexpected to find out the Jordan and Fernandes didn’t say anything to each other about Charlotte Allen.
I hear Aliens from mars text’d “take over the deaf community ooooooo weeee give us deaf braaaaaaaiinnns,” to IKJ. True story.
Deaf Pundit:
Any of Manually Coded English systems do not have any bearings on what constitutes as being linguistically significant. SEE is one of them, but Cued Speech does not fall under this category.
ASL, like any other signed languages of the world, is linguistically sound, which is gestural-visual based. Same goes for English, like any other cued and spoken languages of the world, which is aural-oral based. So, signed languages and cued/spoken languages are proven as bona fide from linguists’ standpoint. It annoys me when some people think signed languages are a derivation of spoken languages because it is not at all.
I can’t sit idly and let someone categorize cued as just a communication system when it is more than that. It happens to be an effective tool and is a 100% visual counterpart of spoken English just as effective a tool as signed and spoken are when it comes to language acquistion.
I want nothing to do with the article except to make this comment. I feel someone needs to write something for this magazine to dispute with the things this author said.
But isn’t Cued Speech a communication system? Yes, an effective tool, a 100% visual counterpart but it’s still an communication system.
To put it in perspective, from a linguistic perspective, writing is considered a communication system.
All of them are communication systems, barring linguistic significance with the exception for signed (ASL, BSL, JSL), cued/spoken (English, Dutch, Mexico) and yes, including written that’s available in every country. Signed languages, cued languages, spoken languages and written languages go beyond just a communication system.
Now, the speech after cued is what I find to be bothersome. If it is 100% visual counterpart of spoken language, why is it called cued speech. By this logic, spoken language should be called spoken speech. It just doesn’t ring for me.
For more information about it by these great people, Earl Fleetwood and Melanie Metzger:
http://www.language-matters.com/difference.php3
cued languages
BUT: cued speech can be used for any spoken language, correct? You can use Cued with spanish or english? It is not by itself a distinct language. You can’t used cued speech WITHOUT using another language as a model.
You can sign ASL but not use English. You can’t use cues but not use English (in America, that is).
That was my point. Oh, and as for the label “cued speech”, I think it is absolutely accurate. It IS speech that is visually enchanced by the use of cues. Right?
You are accurate in that cued speech does not stand alone as a distinct language. It is a 100% visual counterpart of any spoken languages. Cued, like spoken (English) and signed (ASL), is an effective tool to provide full access to languages. That is how I understand it, unless I am wrong.
I think what you don’t realize is that one doesn’t need to have speech skills to be able to cue as long as there’s handshape, hand placement, mouthshape. It is why “Cued Speech” makes no sense to me.
There’s research that shows that babies of cuers do acquire language naturally through cueing therefore it’s cued language, not speech. No deaf babies are able to acquire language through speech. Just my observation.
Okay, but even if you’re not doing any mouthing whatsover, the cues are *still* dependent on the master language which it is layered upon. You can cue English without mouthing.
What would you rather call it? It’s not a language. It’s only a communication system.
How about “Cues”
keep it simple?
;O)
Let me quote the conclusion of Melanie Metzger and Earl Fleetwood’s from their link:
“The terms Cued Speech, cuem, cued English, and cued language have specific meanings. A better understanding of these terms can serve to facilitate a better understanding of language and the nature of communication. As lifelong students of linguistics, we hope that the preceding points of clarification help contribute to that outcome.”
To better understand each term, I ask you or anyone else to go to the link and read it thoroughly. Here it is again:
http://www.language-matters.com/difference.php3
WSS, through cued as an effective tool,
it gives one a full access to a language. I am not sure I can agree that cueing is just a communication system. For one of the Manually Coded English systems, it makes sense to categorize them as just communication systems.
The reason why cueing is seen as a communication tool lies in the definition of language. According to linguistics (I am not a linguist but I try to understand the complex concepts in linguists), the English language is a set of rules along with a set of smallest units of symbols that are combined to form words and sentences. It just happened that the English language was first expressed through the aural system and therefore, the aural system is the only system that is considered part of the English language. Any other systems that are not aural are treated simply as communication tools and are separate from the English language. The writing, signing, cueing and coding (i.e. Morse code) systems are all communication tools that are used to express the English language in somewhat imperfect ways.
The same thing can be said with ASL. ASL is a set of rules along with a set of smallest units of symbols that are combined to form words and sentences. It just happened that ASL was first expressed through the visual system and therefore, the visual system is the only system that is considered part of ASL. Any other systems that are not visual are treated as communication tools and are separate from ASL.
That is the “gospel” preached by the linguists.
I don’t agree with them.
I see each communication system as equivalent to a language. The written English language is different from the spoken English language. The signed English language is different from the spoken English language in several ways. The cued English language is slightly different from the spoken English language. But, all of them do have a language inside their system. It is just impossible to separate a system from a language. But, that is what the linguists do.
I certainly can sympathize with the difficulty that you have in trying to convince others that the English language can be expressed through the cueing system, albeit in a slight different way from the aural system. I can imagine that I would have great difficulty in convincing people that the English language can be expressed through PSE in somewhat imperfect way. The difficulty will not disappear until the linguists start to rethink the definition of language.
Joseph Pietro Riolo
josephpietrojeungriolo@gmail.com
Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain.
The effectiveness of each tool relies
on the natural acquistion of a language.
That is signed language (ASL, BSL, JSL) and cued/spoken (English, British, Japanese.
I do not feel that anytime there is a communication system, it would necessarily mean language is in existence. Let’s take Manually Coded English systems for example. They could be a part of communication system but they have no significance linguistically wise. Linguists have proven that again and again.
Well, these same linguists have said that the cued English language is not a true, natural language and that it is an approximation of the spoken English language.
Too many hearing parents used signed English system to communicate with their deaf children and many of the children did well in English skills. There is only one explanation for this phenomenon: The deaf children did acquire language from their hearing parents. Linguists, naturally, did not accept this phenomenon for it did not fit their paradigm.
Joseph Pietro Riolo
josephpietrojeungriolo@gmail.com
Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain.
I’m a bit confused after reading the article. There are so many things that got me baffled, but one jumped out at me. Do deaf children of deaf adults call themselves CODA? I guess this is technically true, but I always thought CODA was a label for hearing kids of deaf adults.
Also, poor Angel Ramos, he doesn’t get respect anywhere. Or did he change his name to Angel Ramirez and forget to tell himself?
The chickens have come home to roost.
Those are Jordan and Fernandes’ chickens. This just demonstrates how they (Jordan and Fernandes) just cranks in the first place. Look how Jordan and Fernandes attract the attention of other cranks, like Charlotte Allen, Slutzky, Naomi Schaefer Riley, etc.
And now we see they are also attracting sympathy from obvious racists like Charlotte Allen.
The chickens told you to say that didn’t they BR?
I think we really need to consider the source of this article as well. This is the same kind of author who would condemn ANY real kind of social movement. the magazine is run by the neocon kristol, has been financed by rupert murdoch, i mean how far away from ‘objective’ journalism can you get? its a magazine quite favored by the Bush administration — do you really expect them to publish anything in favor of a mass movement that speaks of democracy, that tries to challenge power?
if you want to be concerned about what they publish, i’d be far more concerned about their messages on the war (where Kristol argues the Surge is working), gay marriage, and more. i mean come on they wrote this about gay marriage: http://www.weeklystandard.com/.....e.asp?pg=2
(where they basically argue that gay marriages destroy the institution of marriage as a whole)
give me a break! they even argue libby should be pardoned. and that it’d be fantastic if newt ran for president. if you’re a neocon, then yeah, be concerned what they think of you.. if not, then don’t let this article freak you out, its pretty much the only thing neocons would say about the gally protest.
The founder of the Weekly Standard, William Kristol, is dishonest.
QUOTE
In 2005, Kristol caused controversy by praising President George W. Bush’s second inaugural address without disclosing his role as a consultant to the writing of the speech. Kristol praised the speech highly in his role as a regular political contributor during FOX’s coverage of the address, as well as in a Weekly Standard article, without disclosing his involvement in the speech either time.
UNQUOTE
Click on my name to see the Wikipedia article.
Um, Kristol didn’t write the article. A nice red herring attempt tho’.
Come on, McConnell. He founded the magazine. He has a lot to do with its contents. It helps to know that.
And you’re saying that Kristol over saw the content of the article itself and made the corrections/insertions by editing it himself? Exactly how he had a lot to do with its content?
Pray, please do tell on how you know this.
Oh, for heaven’s sakes, McConnell. I thought you were smarter than this.
Jesus, man. He CREATED the entire magazine! It’s HIS BABY. Everything in it reflects his intent in creating it. It doesn’t matter whether he was involved directly with this particular article or not, he had an influence nevertheless.
I know about his creation of the magazine. It wasn’t the internet where I first read TWS. However, there is a difference between creating a magazine and having an influence versus editorial control over authors on each and every content by Kristol himself. Is it any wonder that you do this knee jerking of yours talking about Kristol’s “dishonesty” (a la red herring) and equating that to the authors of TWS to be just as “dishonest” as well? The subject is about the article (and the author to one degree or another) and not the magazine itself. Why bring up the “dishonesty” of Kristol in the first place? Are you trying to prove something about the authors?
It matters. What’s your problem, McConnell? This is a easy to understand.
I can guarantee you. Kristol had no role in the article, editorialship or the decision to have it placed in TWS.
And secondly, you’re simply projecting. Or wishful thinking. It’s as simple as that. What’s next? Will people say that Rove had a hand in this article?
McConnell, Kristol set the tone for the whole publication when he started it. No one claimed he had a direct role in the article.
And what would that “tone” be?
Go read the magazine and stop trying to have the last word.
You brought it up. You said “tone” and what would that “tone” be? I’m curious. I do read the magazine from time to time but I’m interested on hearing your perspective on exactly what the “tone” that Kristol sets for the magazine.
For God’s sake. Give it up McConnell. It’s a neo-conservative magazine. Everybody knows that.
You said…”tone”. Saying it’s a neo-conservative magazine doesn’t cut it nor does it have any validity in your attempt to explain “tone” anymore than explaining “tone” in a Time magazine article ( http://www.time.com/time/magaz.....-1,00.html ), which a “notorious” now left-leaning liberal media conglomerate, which also reported the story about the Gallaudet protest and such. Even Sonny James, a Deaf activist, fired off a letter to the Time magazine editors about their perception issues on the protest they wrote about.
You have some explaining to do on this so-called “tone” thing about Kristol but if you don’t want to, I understand your predicament.