But it is unfair and dishonest to criticize Pelosi's looks, which is what some in the media insist on doing. Our friends over at Media Matters have documented this tendency, one that misses such things as actual policy and dwells on the superficial.
How exactly does this sort of argument advance political discourse? To our way of thinking, political debate is not worth much when it's about "looks" and similar matters. Unfortunately, such is the state of much broadcast "analysis" these days.
Here's a summary from Media Matters:
Commenting on the controversy surrounding what Nancy Pelosi was told about the use of harsh interrogation techniques, numerous media figures have resorted to attacking Pelosi's looks, for example, by characterizing her as being incapable of "human facial expression," referring to her "fashionable" "Botox shots," and calling her a "hag."
2 comments:
I applaud your sentiments here. It is completely unacceptable to attack someone's looks because you dislike his or her political views.
Now, tell Al Franken before he actually gets seated.
Its a really intresting blog
thanks for this great link ,,
___________________
victor
The only Satellite Television Delivers the Best Value in Entertainment
Post a Comment