Professor Shaffer in flexing his muscles
Professor Shaffer in flexing his muscles about the L.A. Times, argues that the Times is not really that liberal because it calls Hugo Chavez a thug.
Since when is stating the obvious a sign of political orientation; what were they supposed to call him – a sweetheart? Wait a minute, didn’t Nancy Pelosi come up with the exact same label for Mr. Chavez? Are we to assume from this that Ms. Pelosi has become more conservative? Hardly! We could dismiss this on one of 2 bases (neither of which finds support in Shaffer’s reasoning (if you’d call it that)). The first would be that, as the saying goes, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Or, more realistically, every now and then even a lefty has to come to grips with the facts – Mr. Chavez is a thug, and were the Times to take any other position, by denying the obvious, they would destroy what little credibility they have among all but the true believers. Shaffer demonstrates what is becoming more and more obvious about our left-wing academics – they can rationalize and recite, but they can’t reason. The L.A. Times is a left-wing rag, second only to its eastern counterpart, the N.Y. Times in its complete lack of objectivity.
And the reading population is on to them; that’s why their circulation is down, and they’re laying off employees. Hell, they’ve even had to reach out to some token conservative columnists to give the illusion of some measure of balance and objectivity. Stating the obvious, Professor Shaffer, is hardly tantamount to a political conversion.
.