You bet!

pathos.

I’m cool with that, too. Never meant to suggest otherwise.

Instead of taking the long way around the barn, why not just get at whatever it is you want to say?

Well, yes. I would have conceded that instantly. I do not mean to suggest in this post that the SC is a target of the wielding. Instead, I simply made that statement to reinforce the idea that Bush is in command of great political power right now, which includes a favorable SC.

Re: Graber

I’ll get back to you on that.

At a mininum, we would need to agree on a taxonomy. Doris Graber and the Four Theories of the Press might be a place to start.

That would have ended the debate. My target remains who is at the receiving end of the wielding.

Knocking the SC off the list was the first step. Broadening it to both parties was the second. This is a wartime Executive in his final term.

Interesting. Depends on how much difference there is between CL and SR.

Hmmmm…that makes sense to me. You should have said this first I don’t see it this way, but I do understand more now about why this bugged you. And I completely understand now why it appears “rhetorical.” It was That’s not to say I was pulling a fast one here. I was freely interpreting.

Re: who’s the authority?

Good question. I wish I knew. I’m not being flip. I mean, I could argue for me, seeing as how I have those three little letters and all. But you and I both know that’s nonsense. I ask the metrics question merely to point out that my perception and experience of the SC is a certain thing–and yours is another thing, and we’re not going to agree that it is ____ until we agree on a measure.

Re: structural biases

Notice I said classically Liberal, i.e. an Enlightenment ideology (and epistemology).

Could it be a mix of classically liberal and “social responsiblity” ideas?

“For this to be the case, you would have to quantify the ideology by some measure. How do you propose to do that? … I haven’t said, nor do I necessarily think, that you are wrong, i.e. I am right you are wrong in some absolute way. Now how could that be?”

This sets up the classic, “Who’s the authority (here)?” Who gets to decide the metrics? I brought in Jan Crawford’s opinion. Does that prove I’m right and you’re wrong? It does in my transactional universe (where I reign King, might I add)

“You will see that I clearly infer that many of these structural biases spring from classically Liberal ideas. (I ought to edit that inference into a statement.)”

I’ve been trying to clarify this in my mind for a while. The distinction that the political or ideological bias debate is “dumb”, but underpins the structural biases.

One more: bad kairos. “… controls three branches” was superfluous to your argument, IMHO. Ergo, my statement above about rhetorical hyperbole. He is wielding his political capital over the legislative branch – both parties. But I influence you without first “attacking” the party partisan view.