Lies, damn lies, and conservative statistics
Thomas Brennan
Issue date: 2/25/05 Section: Ed-Op
- Page 1 of 3 next >
IN OUR CURRENT media saturated society, it is difficult to discern between a well argued and reasoned point and disingenuous drivel. If we continue to have writers like William Mulgrew around, however, the latter will be easier to spot. In his recent article, "An engrossing tale of two congressional districts," Mr. Mulgrew crafts one of the most ridiculous assaults I have ever read. The disjointed article began by quoting a few derogatory comments of liberal writer Maureen Dowd, whose petty insults Mr. Mulgrew hoped to use to prove the entire Democratic Party as elitist. Anyone familiar with Ms. Dowd would be foolish to assume she is anything but a Democrat, but the last time I checked, Howard Dean was party chairman and Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi were the party's congressional leadership. I very much doubt that Ms. Dowd is involved in shaping the party's platform or message.
But this brief foray aside, there is a larger offense that Mr. Mulgrew is attempting to perpetrate. Comparing House Democrat leader Nancy Pelosi to House Republican leader Dennis Hastert, Mr. Mulgrew seeks to explore the division between the red and blue states. This is a noble effort, but sadly Mr. Mulgrew's own political biases prevent him from doing anything more than bashing Ms. Pelosi and the people she represents. First of all, he compares the ratings each representative received from the American Conservative Union. Mr. Hastert received a 100% rating while the Ms. Pelosi received an 8% rating in 2000, and a 0% in 1998 (Mulgrew neglected to say which year Hastert received his rating). A conservative think tank gave a House Democratic leader a low rating? A female Democrat no less? Shocking stuff.
Mr. Mulgrew then compares the districts they represent. Mulgrew starts with Mr. Hastert, speaking objectively about his previous career as a public school teacher. He does not offer Ms. Pelosi the same courtesy, dismissing her as a child of privilege. I can understand why he wouldn't mention her previous employment history; it took me at least an hour searching the internet to find out that Ms. Pelosi spent her entire career working for the public as part of the California Democratic Party.
But this brief foray aside, there is a larger offense that Mr. Mulgrew is attempting to perpetrate. Comparing House Democrat leader Nancy Pelosi to House Republican leader Dennis Hastert, Mr. Mulgrew seeks to explore the division between the red and blue states. This is a noble effort, but sadly Mr. Mulgrew's own political biases prevent him from doing anything more than bashing Ms. Pelosi and the people she represents. First of all, he compares the ratings each representative received from the American Conservative Union. Mr. Hastert received a 100% rating while the Ms. Pelosi received an 8% rating in 2000, and a 0% in 1998 (Mulgrew neglected to say which year Hastert received his rating). A conservative think tank gave a House Democratic leader a low rating? A female Democrat no less? Shocking stuff.
Mr. Mulgrew then compares the districts they represent. Mulgrew starts with Mr. Hastert, speaking objectively about his previous career as a public school teacher. He does not offer Ms. Pelosi the same courtesy, dismissing her as a child of privilege. I can understand why he wouldn't mention her previous employment history; it took me at least an hour searching the internet to find out that Ms. Pelosi spent her entire career working for the public as part of the California Democratic Party.
is a member of the 
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 2
wjm28
wjm28
posted 3/01/05 @ 1:11 AM EST
Mr. Brennan,
Thank you for responding to my article. Since I'm going to have my hands full with Brad Levinson and Joby Martin's respective articles, I guess I will have to content myself with just posting a response here. (Continued…)
Post a Comment