A Thinking Reed

The Self-Inflation of the Punditocracy

Written by

Lee M.

in

Another article today at TCS opens with this paragraph:

Two of America’s most important Brits — Andrew Sullivan and Christopher Hitchens — have endorsed John Kerry for President. Their endorsements are important because both support an aggressive pursuit of the war on terrorism, an issue where Senator Kerry’s commitment is suspect. Their endorsements are also important because both Sullivan and Hitchens resist taking positions out of blind partisan loyalty. When they take positions, whether you agree with them or not, it is safe to assume that they have thought them through.

Now, with all due respect to Messers. Sullivan and Hitchens, I think it’s extremely easy, especially for those of us who spend a lot of time keeping up with political commentary, to overestimate the importance of what pundits say in general and with respect to their presidential endorsements in particular. For instance, I mentioned to my wife the other day that Andrew Sullivan had come out for Kerry. “Who’s that?” she asked. Keep in mind that she is a student at an Ivy-league law school and very well informed on current events and she had no idea who Sullivan was. A little perspective may be in order.

Comments

One response to “The Self-Inflation of the Punditocracy”

  1. Marcus

    Hitchens doubtless just feels more at home going a bit left on nearly all the socio-con, as well as the money, issues.

    Sullivan views the neo-con wars as a struggle against Muslim medievalism and for women’s lib and buggery. Read any of his many, many, “what are we fighting for” pieces.

    Both of them will be more comfortable with JFK2. The noise and ballyhoo of a neo-con conquest of the Middle East is not necessary for them. The quieter, multilateralist interventionism of the liberals may well strike them as more workable, as well as less dangerous.

    And certainly more ideologically congenial – except for all the money part for Mr. Sullivan, whose only reason for ever calling himself “a conservative” was his desire to keep it all for himself. In that regard, GW is certainly still a better fit for him than JFK2, all that “compassionate conservative” stuff not withstanding.

    Reply

Leave a comment

More posts