My Letter to Time Magazine's Joe Klein

[Justice]

I am posting it here, because it will never see the light of day anywhere else.


Mr. Klein,

I listened to you last night on Laura's show as I was driving home from work. I wanted to share with you my reaction to your appearance. In the first part of your appearance, you and Laura were just yukking it up - she loved your comments about the convention being scripted, managed (my para-phrase). She giggled and chuckled when you commented the slave reparations issue was "ridiculous". She let you state complete sentences. She was delighted, yet slightly surprised that you were saying these things.

Then she baited you by asking you about Michael Moore's stomache. You responded by comparing Michael Moore and Rush Limbaugh. Laura's entire tone of voice changed, gone was the giggling, chuckling, bantering Laura - a hard edge came over her voice. She started interrupting you so you couldn't make your point, or make it coherently. There was extreme tension as she shifted from her attack mode against Democrats to her defensive mode for Republicans. Suddenly we went from Michael Moore has a big gut to we need Rush and Michael because we need all points of view and that is so important. She could not even acknowledge, that Rush was shall we say perhaps a little different than most Americans (even though you acknowledged that Moore was perhaps a little different than most).

I have two comments. First, for a journalist, a columnist of national stature, I ask you to consider whether words like "ridiculous" in response to a comment about slave reparations is beneath you. Ridiculous is a reactionary cheap over-used word in the media today -- it is the Reality TV word of today's media - it is not a legitimate word -- it is a way for people to avoid discussion of substantive issues.

Not that you should agree with those that want slave reparations, mind you, but why not explain your position? You have a gift for expressing yourself with words - why not explain? Do you not feel some sense of pride if not obligation to help inform, educate and enlighten people with a perspective? Frustration today is directed at Washington - at elected officials, at government, but also at the media.

Journalists, columnists and media people respond today explain their positions and reactions all too often by using words like "ridiculous." And there are other equally inflammatory words - for example, one doesn't disagree anymore, they "dismiss" criticism. It is like slapping someone you disagree with - no attempt to have a dialogue or discussion - just again reality TV journalism. Let's raise the bar, let's appeal to the best in people. Laura tried to have you say that Americans needed the world as its partners because we were incapable of handling things alone. She immediately tried to make that your statement. While you valiantly fought her off, don't think she won't be telling people that is what you said -- and because all media is "liberal" that in turn that is what liberals think.

My second comment is more direct. I ask you to consider why Laura Ingraham was physically unable to discuss with you whether Rush is helpful to the dialogue in this country. Physically unable. She immediately resorted to the first amendment - he has a right to speak - but never wanted to discuss the quality of his speech. She only wanted to talk about the size of Michael Moore's gut. What does that say about the media?

Thank you for listening (I hope).

On Edit - I did not mean to say that slave reparations are wrong when I said "should" - I meant to say, he is entitled to his opinion, he does not have to agree, but that I want him to explain why he doesn't agree.

[asjr]

1. I wish I had written that.

[Killarney]

2. It's too bad Joe Klein leans to the right (he's a libertarian)

because he's pretty funny on that VH1 show.

[TreeHuggingLiberal]

3. Good letter...eom