This REALLY Makes Joseph Rago’s Column a ‘Period Piece’
From Joseph Rago’s OpinionJournal.com column at about 9:30 this morning ET:
At 10 AM (per Chris Muir), OJ.com added what I’ll call the “Day by Day edit“:
I guess the editorial “screening” for “originality, expertise, and seriousness” doesn’t always pick up punctuation. :–>
Years from now, as Muir’s cartoon implies, Rago’s column will be seen as a “period piece” in more ways than one.
__________________________
UPDATE: Iowahawk rummaged through the trash and found Rago’s “rough draft” ….. :–> (contains some R-Rated language)
Tom - an Anon left me a link to a Hugh Hewitt interview transcript with Rago, post-opinion piece publication. If you haven’t read it, you might want to.
Comment by Jill — December 27, 2006 @ 6:41 pm
#1, I have, it’s a laugh riot. Heaven help the person who is on the other end of a Hugh Hewitt interview when he’s got the goods on them.
Comment by TBlumer — December 27, 2006 @ 6:55 pm
Totally agree - based on this one interview. As you might imagine, I’m not particularly familiar with Hewitt. But he did a great job with that kid. Seriously - what does it do to your opinion of the WSJ??
Comment by Jill — December 27, 2006 @ 8:37 pm
#3, WSJ’s news reporting and editorializing is mostly top notch, with one awful exception, that being they are totally open-borders advocates.
Their reax to blogs is frustrating beyond belief. For at least 50 years, they were a voice of editorial and reporting sanity against the march of what I see as over-the-top liberalism in its various forms. Their editorials have often had more solid and meaningful hard economic news than most MSM business reports.
Now that WSJ has a very useful potential set of allies in the blogosphere, they act like “we” (meaning all blogs, not just righties) don’t really matter much and are a bunch of rabble. The fact is that “we” (right and left, but IMO mostly right) are turning over rocks that often buttress WSJ’s worldview (except on immigration) while at the same time delivering body blows to the credibility of papers like the NYT, WaPo and LAT, and they don’t even seem to appreciate that it’s happening.
It’s especially weird because WSJ mostly embraced as allies the blogs’ 1980s predecessors in the form of Media Research Center and Accuracy in Media.
Then to give this punk Rago all the column inches he got to write his screed — Zheesh.
Overall — a really strong publication with two huge blind spots (immigration and blogs).
Comment by TBlumer — December 27, 2006 @ 9:53 pm