Is Barbara Streisand on Crack?
As the Magic 8 Ball
would say, "Signs point to yes." Elitist Barbara Streisand is upset that Jonah Goldberg has "replaced" Robert Scheer at the LA Times. Here is Mr. Goldberg's reply.
would say, "Signs point to yes." Elitist Barbara Streisand is upset that Jonah Goldberg has "replaced" Robert Scheer at the LA Times. Here is Mr. Goldberg's reply.
posted by Helen at 1:26 PM
24 Comments:
It's fun to read Jonah Goldberg fisk Ms. Streisand's letter and thank you for directing us to the link. But there's no hope that Barbra Streisand will ever understand how ignorant and misguided she is. These Sreisand-Clooney-Baldwin celebrities are intellectual lost causes.
I am a conservative but I also value true intellectual diversity. My oldest son is attending a liberal university because exposure to a broad range of ideas - liberal, conservative, and all the variations - is important. There is value to cogent liberal views and analysis, but Barbra Streisand is ill-equipped to offer them.
I hope someday our educational system, particularly K-12, will teach core subjects and educate our children so they have the tools to think analytically and write well. The next generations will need both conservative and liberal ideas to make the world a better place, but they can't accomplish anything with inferior educations.
You have to love Barbra's idea of "diversity": more people who think like her.
It's important to note, as Goldberg states, that the execreble Scheer was not REPLACED by Goldberg. Instead, a bunch of people were let go, and a new crop of editorial writers hired.
The balance will certainly still be pro-Left.
But it is nice to see a paper openly decide to have both Right and Left opinions on the....opinion page. Given how the public appears to feel at the voting booth, this only makes sense. It also doesn't harm a newspaper in the slightest to present both sides of an opinion-based issue.
Funny how not only Streisand, but members of Congress wrote a protest letter to the LA TIMES about the heave-ho of Scheer. It's true. Check it out:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-dennis-kucinich/to-the-publisher-of-the-_b_11271.html
Can you imagine the hue and cry if, for example, Novak (yes, he calls himself a Democrat, but you know what I mean) got dumped, and a group of Republican senators and congresscritters wrote to protest?
Why we would never hear the end of "...another chilling example of how politics impinges on journalistic freedom..."
It all comes back to Orwell.
And I am deeply worried by anyone who is threatened by a newspaper that has a "column Left" and "column Right" approach to editorials. Sounds like such people don't want debate, but ideological purity.
Orwell, again.
"Eric Blair"
Mr. Blair,
That is why I put the word replace in quotes--as Goldberg points out that he did not replace him but was hired along with others. Streisand's outburst about the LA Times reminds me of how some liberal friends of mine respond when I talk to them about the one sidedness of the MSM--they always yell--"What about that damned Fox News!" They are just angry that there is one station that dares allow the rest of us another point of view. Thanks for the link.
I can't add anything to what to Goldberg's reply. Glad he emphasized the left's idea of diversty, more of the same. I just don't see how the L.A. Times forgot that all personnel and editorial decisions must be cleared by Barb. She makes Clooney almost look humble and sane.
dadvocate,
That's a scary thought.
I have to say that diversity of opinion is an overrated goal. I'm all for freedom of speech, but that's not quite the same thing as promoting diversity.
For example, when I ask my students to find the antiderivate of x squared, I give no credit for diversity of opinion. The correct answer is x cubed over three, plus a constant. Other answers are wrong. (Granted, if you forget the constant, it's not completely wrong.)
As for Jonah Golberg, I'm not even sure that he wants me to read his columns. The title of his December 2 column is "Eat Yuletide, You Atheistic Bastard!". Now, I had thought that Yule is a pagan term for the winter holidays. But since Goldberg refers to atheists like me as bastards, even if he means it as a "joke", I'm not very interested in his explanations at the moment.
Then again, I hadn't been reading the LA Times regularly before, and I probably still won't.
Greg:
You forgot to snort up some snuff, brush the remains from your laced cuffs, and have the servants pour another glass of port. I realize you intend to come off as a snobbish elitist, but really, it is quite overdone.
elitists snort snuff? who knew?
ah, you're just jealous because you didn't know the antiderivate of x squared.
Yup. That's exactly right. But you have to admit that Greggie has that whole "World of Commander McBragg" upper crust act down.
Who the hell calls the integral an antiderivate? googling for +integral +antiderivate yields 181 cretins. Apparently your just stepping in front of your students is pretty mindblowing for them.
DrLaura, if you don't think that Jonah Goldberg is a step down from Robert Scheer in quality of ideas, than you don't think.
If you google for antiderivative by itself, you get 69,000 hits, the first one being the MathWorld page for it: "see indefinite integral." It's a standard enough term.
I don't think that I am any more "mind-blowing" than anyone else who teaches calculus. I'm also not used to thinking of calculus as "upper crust". After all, AP calculus is a standard high-school course. I suppose that calculus was "upper crust" once upon a time, but not in 21st century America.
$CAV3NG3R: As I said, I am all for freedom of speech. I am also for open debate, but only when the right answers are unclear. There is a limit to the usefulness of diversity of opinion. If you expand diversity of opinion to include clearly incorrect conclusions — for example balancing Copernicus with the geocentric model of the universe — then it is no longer useful. Even completely wrong opinions are protected speech, as they should be, but "protected" is not the same thing as "useful". Neither the LA Times nor any newspaper should feel obliged to diversify good ideas with bad ideas.
Which brings me to Jonah Goldberg. Let's take his recent column title: "Eat Yuletide, You Atheistic Bastard!" Evidently the LA Times wants to balance manners with simple adolescent rudeness. (Which, as that kind of rudeness goes, is usually excused as "humor.") Well, the LA Times is free to do that, and I'm not going to protest it as Barbara Streisand did. On the other hand, I don't see why it is useful.
Also, a tangential point about the math: I am completely familiar with non-Euclidean geometry and it has nothing to do with diversity of opinion. You could call it diversity of topic. There is no more opposition between Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry than between Phillips-head and flathead screwdrivers.
Greg... thought I should point out that columnists don't write their own headlines for their columns - there are headline writers at the paper who do that. The headline is then approved by the editor... could it be that the editor might want to make Goldberg's column unpalatable before anyone goes to read it? Nah - that would never happen... So, I don't think you can blame Goldberg for that one... now the rest of the column is his - feel free to rail away at it.
As for his reply to Ms. Streisand... he's right on with that. She thinks "diversity" means a whole bunch of liberal op-ed people. Not liberal vs conservative op-ed people. I always find that amusing.
That particular headline is a direct quote from the column. Although as I said, Goldberg was passing it off as a joke.
I do not know whether Goldberg writes his own headlines. Ordinary journalists generally don't; opinion columnists are a different category.
$CAV3NG3R: It's a spherical triangle if its angles add to more than 180 degrees. In the Euclidean case, they add to exactly 180. If the angles aren't given, then you can't know.
Here is the sort of diversity of opinion that you are describing: Consider this fish. In your opinion, is it a salmon or a mackerel? I think that it's a red herring.
Antiderivative integrals notwithstanding, why would any of us give a rats rear end what Babs thinks about LAT personnel decisions (or any other topic)?
Beats me. To feel smug for being on the other side, I suppose.
And "smug" is a word with which you have endless experience, Greggie.
Barbra steisand may or may not be on crack but she is just plain cracked a real cracked urn
Linked over to Streisand's web site and thought I had reached Barbara Cartland's in error. That picture is definitely "Dame Barbra"
So Barbara Streisand stopped her subscription to the LA Times. I bet there are a lot of tears over there for her. Why does anyone care what some of the spoiled Hollowood types think anyhow. Are they really a bunch to look up to. What really matters is what the general public thinks anyhow, for we are the majority. Many in Hollywood, though not all, are like spoiled little children who think they should have whatever they want and that whatever they say people should listen to. They are entertainers, or in the old days some would have been court jesters. They should do what they do best and entertain us. If they want to be politicians, then run for office and take your foot out of your mouth. But like they say opinions are like as_holes and everyone has one. It really is nice to see a paper openly decide to have both Right and Left opinions on the....opinion page. Given how the public appears to feel at the voting booth, this only makes sense. It also doesn't harm a newspaper in the slightest to present both sides of an opinion-based issue.
Her name is spelled: Barbra.
quxxo: "DrLaura, if you don't think that Jonah Goldberg is a step down from Robert Scheer in quality of ideas, than you don't think." Sorry, but you have the wrong doctor.
Greg: "Consider this fish. In your opinion, is it a salmon or a mackerel? I think that it's a red herring." I think Christian when I see that. Quit being obstinate with your mathematical logic and gives us examples of political views which are definitely right and definitely wrong.
希望大家都會非常非常幸福~
「朵朵小語‧優美的眷戀在這個世界上，最重要的一件事，就是好好愛自己。好好愛自己，你的眼睛才能看見天空的美麗，耳朵才能聽見山水的清音。好好愛自己，你才能體會所有美好的東西，所有的文字與音符才能像清泉一樣注入你的心靈。好好愛自己，你才有愛人的能力，也才有讓別人愛上你的魅力。而愛自己的第一步，就是切斷讓自己覺得黏膩的過去，以無沾無滯的輕快心情，大步走向前去。愛自己的第二步，則是隨時保持孩子般的好奇，願意接受未知的指引；也隨時可以拋卻不再需要的行囊，一路雲淡風輕。親愛的，你是天地之間獨一無二的旅人，在陽光與月光的交替之中瀟灑獨行.................
aa影片下載城日本情色 視訊視訊交友90739免費視訊情人辣妹av969 免費短片免費色咪咪影片網 a片美女視訊視訊情色網a片免費看夢幻家族影音視訊聊天室嘟嘟情人色網影片土豆網韓劇播放性愛姿勢 sogo 色論壇美眉共和國美女視訊色美眉部落格男同志聊天室免費成人情色愛情公寓aaa片免費看影片sex movie日本美女寫真集情色a片情色交友色情遊戲aio交友愛情館sex999免費影片伊莉成人視訊交友歐美潮吹短片線上a片85cc免費影城
Post a Comment
<< Home