08
Jan
11

Sullivan Live-Derps His Way Through Tragedy

Andrew Sullivan, that august sage of impartial political analysis, is live-blogging the ensuing madness of the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., and several other bystanders today by a deranged gunman, who believed, among other things, in government mind-control:

I have no expertise in this at all, but my impression of his writings and web presence does indeed suggest to me that some mental illness is probably a key part of this. But this does not exonerate violent or excessive rhetoric from the far right or far left: it’s precisely the disturbed who can seize on those kinds of statements and act on them. The danger of violent rhetoric, especially involving gun violence, is its interaction with the disturbed. That was Pelosi’s message last year. (Emphasis added.)

Yeah, Sherlock. Maybe. Indeed, probably. Get this man a doctorate in criminal science. I don’t have the stomach to comment on the rest of Sullivan’s drivel, which is mostly an attempt to prove his knee-jerk assumption that tea baggers and violent, right-wing rhetoric is behind this tragedy. And that what we really need to do is stop this dangerous rhetoric. Then, presumably, these kinds of things wouldn’t happen.

But seriously, in academia, starting out from a conclusion and then trying to prove it, rather than researching and then arriving at a conclusion, is called using a “front-loaded thesis,” otherwise known as being a complete hack.

Gee, I sure hope the media pundits don’t use these peoples’ deaths as a tool to advance their own political narratives. That would be regrettable.

Advertisements

3 Responses to “Sullivan Live-Derps His Way Through Tragedy”


  1. 1 Vincent
    January 8, 2011 at 7:42 pm

    The left is blaming “the teabaggers” and I’ve even seen some righties darkly hinting that this might’ve been some kind of black ops hit designed to give Obama an “Oklahoma City” type massacre to rally the country around.

    The whole thing makes me sick to my stomach. What the hell is wrong with people?

  2. 2 Vincent
    January 8, 2011 at 8:01 pm

    Oh, and this:

    …in academia, starting out from a conclusion and then trying to prove it, rather than researching and then arriving at a conclusion, is called using a “front-loaded thesis,” otherwise known as being a complete hack.

    Quite to the contrary, in academia, starting from a conclusion and then trying to prove it is called “standard operating procedure in the fight to speak truth to power,” which is what a staggering proportion of academics unfortunately see as their primary job.

  3. 3 CJ
    January 10, 2011 at 12:49 pm

    Yeah, I don’t know what I was thinking when I wrote that. I must have forgotten that one time when I went to college for seven years


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: