23 January 2007

Why Can't We Ignore Right Wing Authors When They Invite Us To Do So?

Once again Katha Pollitt has single-handedly redeemed the price of my Nation subscription. Her column in this week's issue - "Ayatollah D'Souza" - dismantles Dinish D'Souza's newly published right-wing rant in which he tries to pin the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the "cultural left" in the U.S. and then recommends that American conservatives make common cause with potenital allies among "traditional Muslims." This is lunacy.

Pollitt has a right to focus on such nuttiness, I suppose, since apprently she is among the targets of D'Souza's ire. However, I also noticed that The New York Times felt obliged to waste column inches on the book in its review section last Sunday. The reviewer, Alan Wolfe (hardly a radical by any estimation), offers a caustic assessment of the new book, saying first that it "is clearly designed to restore his reputation as the man who will say anything to call attention to his views" and then calling it "a national disgrace, a sorry example of a publishing culture more concerned with the sensational than the sensible." At what point will the "liberal" media feel that it can safely ignore such authors?

Labels: ,

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is also the "liberal" media who had Ana Maria Cox review Virginity or Death!. So even when they do pay attention to interesting voices on the left, they have to tart it up so that someone who has enjoyed all the benefits of feminism can whine that Pollitt is "strident".

24 January, 2007 00:36  
Blogger Jim Johnson said...

Here is the definition of strident:

Adjective applied to any person who is funny, smart, articulate, astute, straightforward, and so forth, but who lacks a penis.

24 January, 2007 08:36  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I like the definition, it made me smile. Thanks

24 January, 2007 11:19  

Post a Comment

<< Home