How to Read the Opposition

Tonight, I took a minute of my time to begin reading a column linked through RealClearPolitics by Joe Klien titled the Blink Presidency. Anyone who reads pundits on a daily basis knows Joe Klien and further knows that he is a liberal. Nevertheless, I don't mind reading liberal commentary if it is well argued and reasoned. Afterall, reasonable people should keep an open mind. However, these days, writers like Joe Klien are so out of touch that they blow it and lose readers like myself in the first paragraph by making statements that are obviously false. Take the first paragraph of his column today for example:

It should come as no great revelation that George W. Bush is a wantonly decisive President. He decides Ariel Sharon is good and Yasser Arafat is evil, even though seasoned diplomats tell him it is not wise to make such sweeping judgments. He decides that Social Security needs to be transformed and that private investment accounts are the way to do it, even though the experts say there is no great crisis and his way won't solve anything. He decides to invade Iraq, with minimal contingency planning.

Here Klien states that "the experts said there is no crisis and his way won't solve anything."

What is Klien talking about here....who are the "official" experts? They certainly don't include Alan Greenspan. The real truth is that this is just a dishonest statement. The kind of statement made by an uncompromising liberal. The kind of statement made by a person who won't even concede facts in a debate. The kind of person whose opinion is therefore worthless.

At this point I just hit back space on my browser and went on to a different column, so don't ask me what Klien means regarding the "Blink Presidency." Perhaps Klien doesn't want people like me to read his article. If so his method worked.