A year ago, 84% of Philadelphia voters rejected Rick Santorum as their senator. Naturally, the “liberal” Philadelphia Inquirer responded by hiring him as a columnist. (One assumes he’ll refrain from highlighting local issues, considering that he’s lived in Virginia for several years now.)
Often, with political celebrities who become columnists, ghostwriters step in to actually provide the content. But in Santorum’s case, I sincerely believe that the former senator did his own work. How do I know? Because the writing is atrocious.
My new employer … claimed not so long ago that I “inspire contempt” and “have lost my mind” and that my actions bore a remarkable resemblance to Joe McCarthy’s. You know? The namesake of McCarthyism. At the time, I took solace from the implied compliment. At least The Inquirer thought I was making a substantial mark on my generation. Not bad for someone they also called a “doofus.” […]
Most of the great urban daily papers just feign attempts to balance what is invariably a liberal editorial board. George Will or – for years here at The Inquirer – Tom Ferrick was trotted out as the token voice of the great unwashed.
To The Inquirer’s credit, it has recently added the ideologically unpredictable Michael Smerconish, and now this red-state, red-blooded conservative to their team. Good for them. I mean, us!
Oh my. I hope the Inquirer didn’t give the guy too long a contract.
As for the content, Santorum insisted there isn’t nearly enough civility in politics these days. Coming from him, Santorum’s argument seemed rather ironic.
I have heard for years that Americans are disgusted with the polarization of politics. Much of that, it seems to me, is because people take the path of least resistance and join the crowd. That is why blue areas in America are getting bluer and red areas redder. Some have so personalized their contempt for the opposing view that they can no longer view issues with any sense of inquiry or objectivity. Neither is good for American democracy.
For our system to work, we must be able to debate issues civilly and compromise.
I’m all for “civility,” but I’m also fond of consistency.
A year ago at this time, Santorum was comparing Democrats to Nazi appeasers, and insisting that the only thing standing between the United States and some kind of terrorist-based fascism is his re-election. Eight days before the election, Santorum accused Bob Casey of using state pension funds to “aid and abet terrorism and genocide.” Asked for specific examples, Santorum declined.
And now the former senator has a newspaper column in which he can denounce the dangers associated with the “polarization of politics.” No, I don’t understand it, either.
