Sunday, March 05, 2006

Article IIX

From a news story on the Administrations more aggresive stance on fighting leaks, comes this gem of interpretationalist logic from the The Post editor Leo Downie Jr:
"We do not want to inadvertently threaten human life or legitimately harm national security in our reporting," he said. "But it's important . . . in our constitutional system that these final decisions be made by newspaper editors and not the government."
Two Points:
First, what constitutional system does Downie live in that matters of national security should be decided by EDITORS and not elected officials? Is there some ninth article in the constitution outlining the powers of the media?
Second, I see a big problem with MSM idea un-elected, un-accountable elites thinking of themselves both as the protectors of the people and antagonists to the true representatives.

I was thinking this morning about how the PC in this country are more worried about offending the minority, than the majority. The same black leaders who are offended by the use of statistics showing a higher rate of incarceration for blacks offend me by calling me a racist because I'm a republican (near majority). But I'm not just talking about races. You can't celebrate Christmas in public because you'll offend a minority group, but you can use public money for the production of anti-Christian art. The MSM won't publish tame Mohammed cartoons, but lauds praise on edgy films, music, and art. So what would be a good name for these folk? if Democracy is rule by the people (majority), then what do you call rule by the others (minorities)?
Any thoughts?
Xenocracy? Exocracy?


Post a Comment

<< Home