AGAIN SADLY, NO: A while back the weblog Sadly, No did a thoughtful critique of Lying in Ponds and I responded. Last week, Sadly, No followed up:
The definition of a partisan on LIP is:I think that our positions are not that far apart. It's true that the method here is designed to measure party adherence (considering opposition to the other party as equally indicative of adherence to one's own) and not whether that allegiance is blind, prejudiced or unreasoning. As I've said before, it's not a bug, it's a feature! Although I sometimes comment on obvious (to me) examples of partisan nastiness, the focus here is on trying to discern the difference between the normal ideological preference for one party and actual partisanship. I would argue that Ann Coulter and Robert Scheer are both partisan and unreasoning, while Paul Krugman is far more reasoned but still very partisan. For me, the excessive partisanship of all three renders them unreliable and nearly unreadable, but it doesn't surprise me that some readers find partisanship tolerable when they believe that it's outweighed by other factors. Spinsanity is an outstanding source of nonpartisan, more qualitative analysis of excessively manipulative rhetoric. I'll be content if Lying in Ponds can be successful in its core mission of quantifying simple partisanship in a meaningful way, and readers can judge for themselves whether that partisanship is acceptable in light of other factors.a firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially: one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance
We think that the definition that drives the methodology of LIP however (which counts all references) is the former. And nothing more than a firm adherence to a party, faction or cause is not sufficient to make a columnist's writing the kind of "blind, prejudiced and unreasoning allegiance" that we associate with excessive partisanship. What makes (many) Krugman and (all) Coulter columns so painful to read is not their allegiance, but their propensity to misrepresent, mischaracterize, mislead, use dubious data, etc... in their arguments. But that they nearly always only criticize Republicans and Democrats respectively isn't in and of itself indication of partisanship in the negative sense of the word. [It's worth noting that in his 1994 Peddling Prosperity Krugman had many unkind words for prominent Democrats, including Labor Secretary lawyer but wannabe economist Robert Reich, and economist Lester Thurow, whose then most recent book Clinton read on the campaign trail.]
We agree that a columnist that would only ever criticize one party might get tiresome to read -- and all too often those that do end up writing predictable (and excessively partisan) tripe. But both parties provide endless opportunities for criticism -- focusing one's attention on either may very well be tiring -- but it need not make one an unreasoned partisan.
| Author/ Affiliation |
Title/ Date |
words | PI | Partisan References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Molly Ivins Creators Syndicate |
Us vs. us? 16 September 2003 |
1318 | 84 | 7D+: Howard Dean, Bill Clinton, Clinton administration, Al Gore, Al Gore, Lyndon Johnson, Franklin Roosevelt 14R-: George W. Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush administration, Donald Rumsfeld, Vice President Cheney, Henry Kissinger, Bush, Republican, Republican, Bush administration, Bush, administration 3D=, 1R= |
| Robert Scheer Creators Syndicate |
White House's cynical Iraq ploy 16 September 2003 |
928 | 83 | 19R-: White House, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Bush, Wolfowitz, Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Wolfowitz, Colin Powell, Powell, Wolfowitz, Wolfowitz, administration, the president, the president, Wolfowitz, Cheney, Cheney, Wolfowitz, the president 4R= |
| Brendan Miniter WSJ OpinionJournal |
Hey, Big Spender--II 16 September 2003 |
665 | 68 | 10D-: Jon Corzine, Ted Kennedy, Jon Corzine, Democratic, Corzine, Corzine, Corzine, Corzine, Corzine, Corzine 3R+: Bush administration, President Bush, Bush administration 2D=, 4R= |
| Thomas Oliphant Boston Globe |
Shades of Vietnam 16 September 2003 |
989 | 64 | 1D-: Lyndon Johnson 10R-: PRESIDENT BUSH, administration, administration, administration, President Bush, Bush, administration, President Bush, Bush, Bush 3R= |
| E. J. Dionne Jr. Washington Post |
Handing Out Hardship 16 September 2003 |
959 | 56 | 2D+: Blanche Lincoln, Democrat 3R+: Olympia Snowe, Republican, Cheney 16R-: Bush administration, administration, Vice President Cheney, President Bush, Santorum, administration, Santorum, Santorum, administration, Cheney, administration, Cheney, administration, administration, administration, administration 6R= |
| Mona Charen Creators Syndicate |
At the trough 16 September 2003 |
828 | 50 | 1D+: Lawrence Summers 2D-: Democrats, Democrats 2R+: President Bush, The president 1R= |
| David Brooks New York Times |
Republicans for Dean 16 September 2003 |
914 | 30 | 5D+: John Kerry, John Edwards, Bob Graham, Dean, Wesley Clark 10D-: Dean, Howard Dean, Dean, Dean, Dean, Dean, Democrats, Democrats, Democrats, Dean 4R+: Republicans, Bill McInturff, Republicans, Republicans 5D=, 6R= |
| Richard Cohen Washington Post |
Wall Street Wiseguy 16 September 2003 |
907 | 0 | 2D= |
| David Ignatius Inactive |
The Turkish Card 16 September 2003 |
907 | 0 | 6R= |
| Thomas Sowell Creators Syndicate |
Risky business 16 September 2003 |
762 | 0 |