The Dartmouth Observer

Commentary on politics, history, culture, and literature by two Dartmouth graduates and their buddies

WHO WE ARE

Chien Wen Kung graduated from Dartmouth College in 2004 and majored in History and English. He is currently a civil servant in Singapore. Someday, he hopes to pursue a PhD in History.

John Stevenson graduated from Dartmouth College in 2005 with a BA in Government and War and Peace Studies. He is currently a PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science at the University of Chicago. He hopes to pursue a career in teaching and research.

Kwame A. Holmes did not graduate from Dartmouth. However, after graduating from Florida A+M University in 2003, he began a doctorate in history at the University of Illinois--Urbana Champaign. Having moved to Chicago to write a dissertation on Black-Gay-Urban life in Washington D.C., he attached himself to the leg of John Stevenson and is thrilled to sporadically blog on the Dartmouth Observer. Feel free to email him comments, criticisms, spelling/grammar suggestions.

BLOGS/WEBSITES WE READ

The American Scene
Arts & Letters Daily
Agenda Gap
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Becker and Posner
Belgravia Dispatch
Black Prof
The Corner
Demosthenes
Daniel Drezner
Five Rupees
Free Dartmouth
Galley Slaves
Instapundit
Mickey Kaus
The Little Green Blog
Left2Right
Joe Malchow
Josh Marshall
OxBlog
Bradford Plumer
Political Theory Daily Info
Andrew Samwick
Right Reason
Andrew Seal
Andrew Sullivan
Supreme Court Blog
Tapped
Tech Central Station
UChicago Law Faculty Blog
Volokh Conspiracy
Washington Monthly
Winds of Change
Matthew Yglesias

ARCHIVES

  • July 2002
  • August 2002
  • September 2002
  • October 2002
  • November 2002
  • December 2002
  • January 2003
  • February 2003
  • March 2003
  • April 2003
  • May 2003
  • June 2003
  • July 2003
  • August 2003
  • September 2003
  • October 2003
  • November 2003
  • December 2003
  • January 2004
  • February 2004
  • March 2004
  • April 2004
  • May 2004
  • June 2004
  • July 2004
  • August 2004
  • September 2004
  • October 2004
  • November 2004
  • December 2004
  • January 2005
  • February 2005
  • March 2005
  • April 2005
  • May 2005
  • June 2005
  • July 2005
  • August 2005
  • September 2005
  • October 2005
  • November 2005
  • December 2005
  • January 2006
  • February 2006
  • March 2006
  • April 2006
  • May 2006
  • June 2006
  • July 2006
  • August 2006
  • September 2006
  • November 2006
  • December 2006
  • January 2007
  • February 2007
  • September 2007
  • October 2007
  • December 2007
  • February 2008
  • March 2008
  • April 2008
  • May 2008
  • June 2008
  • November 2008
  • November 2010


    • BOOKS WE'RE READING

    CW's Books



    John's Books



    STUFF

    Site Feed

    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

    Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com Listed on BlogShares
    Tuesday, February 19, 2008
     
    Media Double Standards

    From a great article about how Clinton's narrative about the race are trapping her, whereas Obama's are freeing him.

    Divergence in tone is one thing, double standards [in the are another. And it’s the latter that most galls the former advisers to the other, now-departed, Democratic candidates. “Obama has been able to get away with a stunning amount of hypocrisy that would get called on her,” says one such operative. “They’ve run the nastiest, most deceptive pieces of paid media: the mailer they did lying about her health-care plan, with the Harry and Louise look-alikes. The idea that it took Hillary growling Tony Rezko’s name in a debate to get any national coverage. How he complained in Iowa about 527s and then had them supporting him like crazy in Nevada and California. And nobody says a peep about it. It’s fucking comical!”

    There are countless other examples of this syndrome, both large and small. The way that Clinton’s famous fumbling of a question about whether illegal immigrants should be allowed to have driver’s licenses in a debate last fall was hammered on for weeks—whereas Obama’s flubbing of the same question in the next debate was essentially let slide. The way that Obama’s evisceration of his rival in his stump speeches was applauded by the media—whereas Clinton’s plunge into negative territory was widely condemned. The way that Clinton was roundly criticized for being inaccessible, and thus unaccountable, to the press—when Obama has since January been even less available for questioning than she.



    Posted by John Stevenson at 3:48 PM |

    HOME