| What was most infuriating about the Star Tribune publishing Michael Gerson's attack on Sen. Al Franken? Could it be that a really excellent speech pointing out the truth about our Supreme Court was completely misrepresented by George W. Bush's former speechwriter? Could it be the Strib's limited coverage of politics? Could it be they failed to cover a really excellent speech by Franken? Could it be they've always had it in for Franken?
Let's start with Gerson. He wrote speeches for Bush from 1999 to 2006. He wrote the speeches Bush gave as he lied us into war with Iraq. He wrote the Mission Accomplished speech. Since resigning from the Bush Administration, he's been attacking anyone who points out the truth about conservatives and telling lies to push the far right's agenda. He's in high dudgeon because someone spoke out against an icon of the far right. His first six paragraphs are simply ad hominem attacks on Franken.
What about the Strib editors? This is the same group who did everything they could to get Norm Coleman reelected. The paper's political coverage is so poor and so slanted rightwards that I would be criticizing their editorial page several times a week if I didn't have better things to do with my life. They almost completely rely on DC pundits to provide commentary on national issues.
So the only way that their readers knew Franken gave a speech is because a far right ideologue attacked him for it on their editorial page. They can't hire any more people to help them cover politics because their reader base is disintegrating and their ad revenue is in steady decline. Who is in charge of covering Franken? Apparently nobody. So they rely on hacks like Gerson.
There is two parts of Gerson's attack piece that are true: Al Franken is a Senator from Minnesota and this quote from the speech:
... The "Roberts court has consistently and intentionally protected and promoted the interests of the powerful over those of individual Americans."
The rest is utter rubbish. |
