Pages: 1 2 |
|
 Print This Post
|
Upon visiting the Chicago Sun-Times blog of Roger Ebert, the popular film critic who has been known to pepper his reviews with Left-leaning political commentary, one of the first things you might notice is a list of accolades from impressive sources. The National Society of Newspaper Columnists regarded Ebert’s online journal as the “best blog” of 2010.
The variety of Roger Ebert’s subjects, the excellence of his writing, his humanity and sense of his mortality, and the clarity and depth with which he writes about each subject, make his work stand out and give it lasting value. His work will be part of his literary legacy.
Yet, when you actually read what Ebert writes, it becomes apparent the judges mistook articulation and breath for “clarity and depth.” Consider a recent diatribe against – well, everyone – which circles in high orbit around BP and the Gulf oil spill.
Corporations know no patriotism. They are multi-national. They deal with all markets. It is hard to say just where a big corporation is actually centered. They may have a corporate edifice, but it can be anywhere…
Legislation affecting these corporations essentially must be approved by their lobbyists. I know this, you know this, and we can’t [sic] prove it. Their opponents are portrayed as extremists, Greens, subversives, nut cases, eccentrics, socialists, and so on. Attempts to organize Wal-Mart workers have never been successful, even though they have no reason to be loyal to the company. Wal-Mart opposes labor unions by methods that have not effectively been policed.
But I’m wading into deeper waters here. I simply want to point out that BP, to take one corporation, has been associated with a grave misdeed against the United States and the world. Let me begin with a tiny anecdote…
Confused yet? This is from the middle of a post entitled “BP’s tree fell on my lawn,” and it never makes more sense than that.
It reminds me of debates I’ve had with certain Leftists. Once the bounds of reason begin closing in, their panicked response to mental claustrophobia is to filibuster with a manifesto. It’s like cheating in a race by tossing random debris in the path of your opponent. They throw down a plethora of unsubstantiated claims and distortions, hoping it will sidetrack from the point where you had them dead to rights.
Here, Ebert’s disjointed rant seems less a tactic than a dictation from his inner monologue. Nevertheless, it remains a bushel of red herring detracting from the issue at hand.
